Hello Milan, > By corrupting the image? :) See tests/verity-compat-test in cryptsetup > tree, it is basic regression test which is simulating both data and hash > corruption (it just dd random data to know offset and expects failure.) In tests/verity-compat-test, in the following line "check_root_hash 512 9de18652fe74edfb9b805aaed72ae2aa48f94333f1ba5c452ac33b1c39325174 $SALT 1 sha256 8388608" How's the last parameter (hash_offset) calculated? it's hard coded here(8388608). Regards, Pavan > Hi All, > > Thanks a lot for your support. Now I am able to configure verity target > using both veritysetup & dmsetup. > > Regards, > Pavan > > >> >> On 05/23/2013 08:41 AM, pavankumar.p@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: >>> 1. What are the difference between configuring a verity target using >>> dmsetup & veritysetup. Can these be used interchangeably? >> >> dmsetup is just low level tool, you need to know all table parameters >> while veritysetup will prepare table for you using high level commands >> and on-disk metadata (if present). >> >>> 2. I tried passing the root hash value generated by veritysetup as a >>> parameter to dmsetup but this doesn't work. On doing dmsetup status, >>> the >>> output is showing as the target corrupted (C). I examined dmesg & found >>> the following error >> >> Be sure you are using proper parameters, metadata version etc. >> >> Try activate device with veritysetup, then run "dmsetup table" and >> check what is different in your dmsetup line. >> >>> 3. After creating a verity target using "veritysetup" how to test the >>> target for corrupted case (As soon as creating the status is Verified >>> (V)) >> >> By corrupting the image? :) See tests/verity-compat-test in cryptsetup >> tree, it is basic regression test which is simulating both data and hash >> corruption (it just dd random data to know offset and expects failure.) >> >> Milan >> > > -- dm-devel mailing list dm-devel@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel
