linux-nfs.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com>
To: "Myklebust, Trond" <Trond.Myklebust@netapp.com>
Cc: Simo Sorce <simo@redhat.com>, dhowells <dhowells@redhat.com>,
	linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org, krbdev <krbdev@mit.edu>
Subject: Re: GSSAPI Proxy initiative
Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2011 10:13:38 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAK3OfOjqCjU4O--XwVBpSBE9pwwkyBEU6OiNLN8_dM6wYe5A1w@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2E1EB2CF9ED1CB4AA966F0EB76EAB4430BFA90EE@SACMVEXC2-PRD.hq.netapp.com>

On Thu, Nov 3, 2011 at 5:16 PM, Myklebust, Trond
<Trond.Myklebust@netapp.com> wrote:
>> It is ok to use keyring if that's deemed the right place for session keys, but I
>> think you already have structures where you currently store them so I don't
>> thik you necessarily need to change that part of the kernel implementation.
>
> No, but we still need to be able to do recovery of rpcsec_gss contexts once they are broken, and right now we have a major flaw due to the fact that recovery depends on a lot of small processes and data that is allowed to be swapped out at the moment when we need them the most (i.e. in a memory reclaim situation).
>
> If the server reboots while our client is in the middle of writing back a file (or several files), then the client needs to recover those rpcsec_gss contexts that authenticate the processes which own any dirty pages that remain to be written out.
> Key security is an irrelevant concern once your kernel deadlocks in an OOM state.

Ah, this problem.  Hopefully the client has enough resources to thrash
a lot in the process but still manage to recover.  A better solution
(see below) is possible, but will require more protocol/mechanism
work.

>> Currently credential caches are stored in files, is there a problem with that
>> model ? Do you need access to credential caches from the kernel when
>> under memory pressure ?
>
> Yes, there is a major problem with that model, and yes we do potentially need access to credential caches when in a recovery situation (which is a situation when we are usually under memory pressure).

Ideally we could store in each RPCSEC_GSS context (not GSS context)
enough state on the client side to recover quickly when the server
reboots.  How would we do this?  Suppose the server gives the client a
"ticket", and a key much like the Kerberos ticket session key is
agreed upon or sent by the server -- that could be stored in the
RPCSEC_GSS context and could be used to recover it quickly for
recovery from server reboot.  I'm eliding a lot of details here, but I
believe this is fundamentally workable.

A similar solution would be to store some GSS "sub-credential" in the
RPCSEC_GSS context, but this would work for Kerberos and maybe not so
well for other mechanisms -- and even with Kerberos, the service
ticket might be expired when it comes time to recover.  So I prefer
the RPCSEC_GSS-level solution I mentioned above.

If you agree with me on this then this sub-thread will be best moved
to the NFSv4 WG, particularly if we agree on a protocol-level
solution.

Nico
--

  parent reply	other threads:[~2011-11-04 15:13 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2011-11-02 21:26 GSSAPI Proxy initiative Simo Sorce
2011-11-02 23:05 ` Simo Sorce
2011-11-03  3:24 ` Nico Williams
2011-11-03 14:58   ` Simo Sorce
2011-11-03 16:05     ` Nico Williams
2011-11-03 16:31       ` Simo Sorce
2011-11-03 18:57         ` Nico Williams
2011-11-03 20:39           ` Trond Myklebust
2011-11-03 20:53             ` Nico Williams
2011-11-03 21:30               ` Simo Sorce
2011-11-03 21:46                 ` Trond Myklebust
2011-11-03 22:00                   ` Simo Sorce
2011-11-03 22:16                     ` Myklebust, Trond
2011-11-03 23:47                       ` Simo Sorce
2011-11-04 14:34                         ` J. Bruce Fields
2011-11-04 15:13                       ` Nico Williams [this message]
2011-11-04 15:36                         ` Nico Williams
2011-11-04 15:55                         ` Adamson, Andy
2011-11-04 16:20                           ` Nico Williams
2011-11-04 16:25                             ` Simo Sorce
2011-11-04 16:43                               ` Nico Williams
2011-11-04 16:30                             ` Adamson, Andy
2011-11-04 16:42                               ` Nico Williams
2011-11-04 14:51                   ` Nico Williams
2011-11-03 21:58             ` Tom Yu
2011-11-03 15:42 ` Nico Williams
2011-11-03 16:10   ` Simo Sorce

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=CAK3OfOjqCjU4O--XwVBpSBE9pwwkyBEU6OiNLN8_dM6wYe5A1w@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=nico@cryptonector.com \
    --cc=Trond.Myklebust@netapp.com \
    --cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
    --cc=krbdev@mit.edu \
    --cc=linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=simo@redhat.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).