linux-wireless.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* using keys service for wireless
@ 2007-03-06 18:58 Johannes Berg
  2007-03-08 12:43 ` David Howells
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 2+ messages in thread
From: Johannes Berg @ 2007-03-06 18:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: wireless; +Cc: David Howells

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1972 bytes --]

Hi all,

Months later... I finally thought about whether we should be using the
key service (Documentation/keys.txt) for wireless. I think I've decided
against that but want to present my thoughts here just in case someone
jumps in to tell me where I'm wrong :)

So let me start with an analysis of how we currently use keys. Normally,
when we set up an encrypted wireless connection, we do two things at the
same time: we tell the driver (or mac80211 stack) to use encryption and
hand it a key. There are keys of various types based on which we decided
what kind of encryption userspace is trying to set up.

After the key has been set we encrypt all frames that go out with that
key. Oh, there's an issue with group keys vs. pairwise keys which means
that a single connection can have multiple keys and for outgoing packets
we choose one of them to do the encryption with, same for incoming
packets.

For master mode (access point), we have a key per station and possibly
some more keys, but the basic principle is the same: we hand the
stack/driver a key and it uses it for en- and decryption.

There's basically no lifetime management going on, the key is usually
valid until removed by userspace. In some cases there needs to be key
renegotiation, but this is handled entirely in userspace anyway.

Looking at this, I notice that if we wanted to use the key service we'd
still have to tell the stack/driver about the encryption type [1] we
want to use as well as when to start using it. Since we have no lifetime
issues here, using the key service doesn't seem to really gain us
anything and makes the userspace interface more complicated (the actual
key data would be transported out of band while the command to use it
still is in nl80211)

Does anybody have a differing opinion? If not, I'll add the required
primitives to nl80211.

johannes

[1] we could of course use many many key types or the key description
for this

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 190 bytes --]

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2007-03-08 12:43 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 2+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2007-03-06 18:58 using keys service for wireless Johannes Berg
2007-03-08 12:43 ` David Howells

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).