Re: is rgw crypt default encryption key long term supported ?

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Hello Casey


Thank you for your reply.
To close this subject, one last question.

Do you know if it is possible to rotate the key defined by "rgw_crypt_default_encryption_key=" ?


Best Regards
Francois Scheurer



________________________________________
From: Casey Bodley <cbodley@xxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2019 5:37 PM
To: Scheurer François; ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: is rgw crypt default encryption key long term supported ?

On 5/28/19 11:17 AM, Scheurer François wrote:
> Hi Casey
>
>
> I greatly appreciate your quick and helpful answer :-)
>
>
>> It's unlikely that we'll do that, but if we do it would be announced with a long deprecation period and migration strategy.
> Fine, just the answer we wanted to hear ;-)
>
>
>> However, I would still caution against using either as a strategy for
>> key management, especially when (as of mimic) the ceph configuration is
>> centralized in the ceph-mon database [1][2]. If there are gaps in our
>> sse-kms integration that makes it difficult to use in practice, I'd
>> really like to address those.
> sse-kms is working great, no issue or gaps with it.
> We already use it in our openstack (rocky) with barbican and ceph/radosgw (luminous).
>
> But we have customers that want encryption by default, something like SSE-S3 (cf. below).
> Do you know if there are plans to implement something similar?
I would love to see support for sse-s3. We've talked about building
something around vault (which I think is what minio does?), but so far
nobody has taken it up as a project.
>
> Using dm-crypt would cost too much time for the conversion (72x 8TB SATA disks...) .
> And dm-crypt is also storing its key on the monitors (cf. https://www.spinics.net/lists/ceph-users/msg52402.html).
>
>
> Best Regards
> Francois Scheurer
>
>
> Amazon SSE-3 description:
>
> https://docs.aws.amazon.com/AmazonS3/latest/dev/UsingServerSideEncryption.html
> Protecting Data Using Server-Side Encryption with Amazon S3-Managed Encryption Keys (SSE-S3)
> Server-side encryption protects data at rest. Amazon S3 encrypts each object with a unique key. As an additional safeguard, it encrypts the key itself with a master key that it rotates regularly. Amazon S3 server-side encryption uses one of the strongest block ciphers available, 256-bit Advanced Encryption Standard (AES-256), to encrypt your data.
>
>
> https://docs.aws.amazon.com/AmazonS3/latest/API/RESTBucketPUTencryption.html
> The following is an example of the request body for setting SSE-S3.
> <ServerSideEncryptionConfiguration xmlns="http://s3.amazonaws.com/doc/2006-03-01/";>
>    <Rule>
>      <ApplyServerSideEncryptionByDefault>
>              <SSEAlgorithm>AES256</SSEAlgorithm>
>      </ApplyServerSideEncryptionByDefault>
> </Rule>
> </ServerSideEncryptionConfiguration>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ________________________________________
> From: Casey Bodley <cbodley@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2019 3:55 PM
> To: Scheurer François; ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: is rgw crypt default encryption key long term supported ?
>
> Hi François,
>
>
> Removing support for either of rgw_crypt_default_encryption_key or
> rgw_crypt_s3_kms_encryption_keys would mean that objects encrypted with
> those keys would no longer be accessible. It's unlikely that we'll do
> that, but if we do it would be announced with a long deprecation period
> and migration strategy.
>
>
> However, I would still caution against using either as a strategy for
> key management, especially when (as of mimic) the ceph configuration is
> centralized in the ceph-mon database [1][2]. If there are gaps in our
> sse-kms integration that makes it difficult to use in practice, I'd
> really like to address those.
>
>
> Casey
>
>
> [1]
> https://ceph.com/community/new-mimic-centralized-configuration-management/
>
> [2]
> http://docs.ceph.com/docs/mimic/rados/configuration/ceph-conf/#monitor-configuration-database
>
>
> On 5/28/19 6:39 AM, Scheurer François wrote:
>> Dear Casey, Dear Ceph Users The following is written in the radosgw
>> documentation
>> (http://docs.ceph.com/docs/luminous/radosgw/encryption/): rgw crypt
>> default encryption key = 4YSmvJtBv0aZ7geVgAsdpRnLBEwWSWlMIGnRS8a9TSA=
>>
>>    Important: This mode is for diagnostic purposes only! The ceph
>> configuration file is not a secure method for storing encryption keys.
>>
>>      Keys that are accidentally exposed in this way should be
>> considered compromised.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Is the warning only about the key exposure risk or does it mean also
>> that the feature could be removed in future?
>>
>>
>> The is also another similar parameter "rgw crypt s3 kms encryption
>> keys" (cf. usage example in
>> http://lists.ceph.com/pipermail/ceph-users-ceph.com/2018-October/030679.html).
>> <http://lists.ceph.com/pipermail/ceph-users-ceph.com/2018-October/030679.html>
>>
>>
>> Both parameters are still interesting (provided the ceph.conf is
>> encrypted) but we want to be sure that they will not be dropped in future.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Best Regards
>>
>> Francois
>>

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature

_______________________________________________
ceph-users mailing list
ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com

[Index of Archives]     [Information on CEPH]     [Linux Filesystem Development]     [Ceph Development]     [Ceph Large]     [Linux USB Development]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [xfs]


  Powered by Linux