|
Message-ID: <CAHmME9r4Pag4ML-GVaKHFTZ_T_unhWg1LxVuEk6wKp006ZAFXg@mail.gmail.com> Date: Tue, 12 May 2020 20:33:11 -0600 From: "Jason A. Donenfeld" <Jason@...c4.com> To: David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com> Cc: keyrings@...r.kernel.org, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>, Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>, kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com, Eric Biggers <ebiggers@...gle.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] security/keys: rewrite big_key crypto to use library interface On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 4:03 PM David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com> wrote: > > Jason A. Donenfeld <Jason@...c4.com> wrote: > > > So long as that ->update function: > > 1. Deletes the old on-disk data. > > 2. Deletes the old key from the inode. > > 3. Generates a new key using get_random_bytes. > > 4. Stores that new key in the inode. > > 5. Encrypts the updated data afresh with the new key. > > 6. Puts the updated data onto disk, > > > > then this is fine with me, and feel free to have my Acked-by if you > > want. But if it doesn't do that -- i.e. if it tries to reuse the old > > key or similar -- then this isn't fine. But it sounds like from what > > you've described that things are actually fine, in which case, I guess > > it makes sense to apply your patch ontop of mine and commit these. > > Yep. It calls big_key_destroy(), which clears away the old stuff just as when > a key is being destroyed, then generic_key_instantiate() just as when a key is > being set up. > > The key ID and the key metadata (ownership, perms, expiry) are maintained, but > the payload is just completely replaced. Okay, in that case, take my: Acked-by: Jason A. Donenfeld <Jason@...c4.com> And then perhaps you can take both my patch and your addendum into keys-next. Jason
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.