public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
To: Kyle Moffett <mrmacman_g4@mac.com>
Cc: Blair Strang <bls@asterisk.co.nz>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>,
	lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: In-kernel Authentication Tokens (PAGs)
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 15:22:21 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <9960.1087395741@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3943FF92-BEFE-11D8-95EB-000393ACC76E@mac.com>


> One thing that I would very much like to have is the ability to create a new
> shell with a new keyring, such that I can still see and use the old keyring,
> but I can create new keys without modifying the old keyring, even to the
> extent of masking out keys in the old keyring without modifying them for
> other processes.  From my brief glance at your patch, that's not a feature
> you have implemented.

Hmmm... What exactly are you wanting to do? Each task theoretically subscribes
to five keyrings (the group one isn't yet there) in this model; three of which
are transferred across a fork, and four across CLONE_THREAD.

The five keyrings are:

	- Group (associated with primary GID)
	- User (associated with UID)
	- Session (voluntarily discarded)
	- Process (shared between threads in a process)
	- Thread (one per thread)

> I would also like the ability to mark a key as unreadable except by kernel
> threads or processes with CAP_KEYRING.

What do you mean by "unreadable"?

Currently, userspace can't see the data attached to a key. It can only see the
description, and only then through /proc/keys.

> If I can pass key "handles" of some sort over UNIX sockets, then I can also
> pass an unreadable key to a daemon process which uses it to access my files
> until I revoke the key.

I can see what you're getting at.

I think I need to create some more operations:

  (*) Retire/Revoke key

  (*) Add key to another keyring

  (*) Remove key from keyring

  (*) List keyring

  (*) Describe key

  (*) Read key (if not protected)

  (*) Create keyring

I have pondered representing keyspace with some sort of filesystem interface
(using vfs ops to represent the operations), but that could require hardlinked
directories (keyrings) to pull off - either that or symlinks.

Also, there's the problem of security on the operations themselves. How do you
determine what a process is allowed to do?

Either I should only allow access to keys and keyrings to which a process is
subscribed, or I should attach UID/GID/MASK values to every key and keyring.

David

  parent reply	other threads:[~2004-06-16 14:22 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 40+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2004-06-12  2:37 In-kernel Authentication Tokens (PAGs) Kyle Moffett
2004-06-12  3:13 ` Andy Lutomirski
2004-06-12  4:57   ` Kyle Moffett
2004-06-12  5:34     ` Andy Lutomirski
2004-06-12 12:51       ` Kyle Moffett
2004-06-12 15:37         ` Andy Lutomirski
2004-06-12 17:15           ` Kyle Moffett
2004-06-12  3:15 ` Chris Wright
2004-06-12  4:48   ` Kyle Moffett
2004-06-12 20:53     ` Chris Wright
2004-06-12 21:15       ` Kyle Moffett
2004-06-12 21:44         ` Chris Wright
2004-06-12 21:58           ` Kyle Moffett
2004-06-12 22:51             ` Chris Wright
2004-06-12 23:40               ` Kyle Moffett
2004-06-12 22:51 ` Trond Myklebust
2004-06-12 23:33   ` Kyle Moffett
2004-06-12 23:58     ` Trond Myklebust
2004-06-13  0:23       ` Kyle Moffett
2004-06-15  6:38         ` Blair Strang
2004-06-15  7:03           ` Trond Myklebust
2004-06-15  9:36             ` David Howells
2004-06-15 19:00               ` Kyle Moffett
2004-06-15 22:07                 ` Chris Wright
2004-06-15 23:48                   ` Kyle Moffett
2004-06-16  0:01                     ` Chris Wright
2004-06-16  0:06                       ` Kyle Moffett
2004-06-16 14:22                 ` David Howells [this message]
2004-06-15 22:29               ` Chris Wright
2004-06-16 14:37                 ` David Howells
2004-06-15 23:59               ` Kyle Moffett
2004-06-16 14:49                 ` David Howells
2004-06-17  1:13                   ` Kyle Moffett
2004-06-17 11:48                     ` David Howells
2004-06-17 19:06                       ` Kyle Moffett
2004-06-23 12:29                         ` David Howells
2004-06-23 21:03                           ` Kyle Moffett
2004-06-29 17:07                           ` Kyle Moffett
2004-07-07 18:54                             ` John Bucy
2004-07-08  1:29                               ` Kyle Moffett

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=9960.1087395741@redhat.com \
    --to=dhowells@redhat.com \
    --cc=bls@asterisk.co.nz \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mrmacman_g4@mac.com \
    --cc=torvalds@osdl.org \
    /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