On Wed, Nov 13, 2019 at 12:35:51PM -0800, Eric Biggers wrote: > On Wed, Nov 06, 2019 at 04:12:59PM -0800, Eric Biggers wrote: > > From: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > Extend the FS_IOC_ADD_ENCRYPTION_KEY ioctl to allow the raw key to be > > specified by a Linux keyring key, rather than specified directly. > > > > This is useful because fscrypt keys belong to a particular filesystem > > instance, so they are destroyed when that filesystem is unmounted. > > Usually this is desired. But in some cases, userspace may need to > > unmount and re-mount the filesystem while keeping the keys, e.g. during > > a system update. This requires keeping the keys somewhere else too. > > > > The keys could be kept in memory in a userspace daemon. But depending > > on the security architecture and assumptions, it can be preferable to > > keep them only in kernel memory, where they are unreadable by userspace. > > > > We also can't solve this by going back to the original fscrypt API > > (where for each file, the master key was looked up in the process's > > keyring hierarchy) because that caused lots of problems of its own. > > > > Therefore, add the ability for FS_IOC_ADD_ENCRYPTION_KEY to accept a > > Linux keyring key. This solves the problem by allowing userspace to (if > > needed) save the keys securely in a Linux keyring for re-provisioning, > > while still using the new fscrypt key management ioctls. > > > > This is analogous to how dm-crypt accepts a Linux keyring key, but the > > key is then stored internally in the dm-crypt data structures rather > > than being looked up again each time the dm-crypt device is accessed. > > > > Use a custom key type "fscrypt-provisioning" rather than one of the > > existing key types such as "logon". This is strongly desired because it > > enforces that these keys are only usable for a particular purpose: for > > fscrypt as input to a particular KDF. Otherwise, the keys could also be > > passed to any kernel API that accepts a "logon" key with any service > > prefix, e.g. dm-crypt, UBIFS, or (recently proposed) AF_ALG. This would > > risk leaking information about the raw key despite it ostensibly being > > unreadable. Of course, this mistake has already been made for multiple > > kernel APIs; but since this is a new API, let's do it right. > > > > Signed-off-by: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@xxxxxxxxxx> > > David and Jarkko, are you okay with this patch from a keyrings subsystem > perspective? Thanks for reminding. Still catching up with keyring. I gave some feedback to the patch. /Jarkko ______________________________________________________ Linux MTD discussion mailing list http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-mtd/