linux-ext4 - Re: [RFC PATCH V2 07/11] fscrypt_zeroout_range: Encrypt all zeroed out blocks of a page

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Thu, 05 Apr 2018 12:33:26 +0530
From:   Chandan Rajendra <chandan@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To:     "Theodore Y. Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>
Cc:     Eric Biggers <ebiggers3@...il.com>, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fscrypt@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH V2 07/11] fscrypt_zeroout_range: Encrypt all zeroed out blocks of a page

On Wednesday, March 28, 2018 1:10:56 AM IST Theodore Y. Ts'o wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 26, 2018 at 01:52:54PM +0530, Chandan Rajendra wrote:
> > > Also, it looks like when you renamed the *_page fscrypt functions to
> > > *_blocks, on the write side, a bounce page is still being used for
> > > each block.  So so an an architecture which has 64k pages, and we are
> > > writing to a file sytem with 4k blocks, to write a 64k page, the
> > > fscrypt layer will have to allocate 16 64k bounce pages to write a
> > > single 64k page to an encrypted file.  Am I missing something?
> > > 
> > 
> > ext4_bio_write_page() invokes the new fscrypt_encrypt_block() function for
> > each block of the page that has been marked with "Async write". For all blocks
> > of the page that needs to be written to the disk, we pass the same bounce page
> > as an argument to fscrypt_encrypt_block().
> 
> Thanks for the explanation.  I do wonder if the proper thing to export
> from the fscrypt layer is fscrypt_encrypt_page(), since for all file
> systems, the only thing which really makes sense is to read and write
> a full page at a time, since we cache things at the page cache a full
> page a time.  So instead of teaching each file system how to use
> fscrypt_{encrypt,decrypt}_block, maybe push that into the fscrypt
> layer, and implement a new fscrypt_encrypt_page() which calls
> fs_encrypt_block()?
> 

I encountered a problem when refactoring the code to get fscrypt layer to
encrypt all the blocks of a page by internally calling
fscrypt_encrypt_block().

It is the filesystem which knows which subset of blocks mapped by a page that
needs to be encrypted. For example, ext4_bio_write_page() marks such blocks
with "Async Write" flag and later in another pass, it encrypts and also adds
these blocks to a bio. So IMHO, I think fscrypt layer should limit itself to
encrypting/decrypting file data in block size units.

-- 
chandan