[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190512125816.GK15846@desktop>
Date: Sun, 12 May 2019 20:58:16 +0800
From: Eryu Guan <guaneryu@...il.com>
To: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@...nel.org>
Cc: fstests@...r.kernel.org, linux-fscrypt@...r.kernel.org,
linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org, linux-f2fs-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/7] xfstests: verify fscrypt-encrypted contents and
filenames
On Mon, May 06, 2019 at 08:57:22AM -0700, Eric Biggers wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 26, 2019 at 01:41:46PM -0700, Eric Biggers wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > This series adds xfstests which verify that encrypted contents and
> > filenames on ext4 and f2fs are actually correct, i.e. that the
> > encryption uses the correct algorithms, keys, IVs, and padding amounts.
> > The new tests work by creating encrypted files, unmounting the
> > filesystem, reading the ciphertext from disk using dd and debugfs or
> > dump.f2fs, and then comparing it against ciphertext computed
> > independently by a new test program that implements the same algorithms.
> >
> > These tests are important because:
> >
> > - The whole point of file encryption is that the files are actually
> > encrypted correctly on-disk. Except for generic/399, current xfstests
> > only tests the filesystem semantics, not the actual encryption.
> > generic/399 only tests for incompressibility of encrypted file
> > contents using one particular encryption setting, which isn't much.
> >
> > - fscrypt now supports 4 main combinations of encryption settings,
> > rather than 1 as it did originally. This may be doubled to 8 soon
> > (https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10908153/). We should test all
> > settings. And without tests, even if the initial implementation is
> > correct, breakage in one specific setting could go undetected.
> >
> > - Though Linux's crypto API has self-tests, these only test the
> > algorithms themselves, not how they are used, e.g. by fscrypt.
> >
> > Patch 1 is a cleanup patch. Patches 2-4 add the common helpers for
> > ciphertext verification tests. Patches 5-7 add the actual tests.
> >
> > These tests require e2fsprogs and f2fs-tools patches I recently sent out
> > to fix printing encrypted filenames. So, this series might not be
> > suitable for merging into mainline xfstests until those patches are
> > applied. Regardless, comments are appreciated. The needed patches are:
> >
> > debugfs: avoid ambiguity when printing filenames (https://marc.info/?l=linux-ext4&m=155596495624232&w=2)
> > f2fs-tools: improve filename printing (https://sourceforge.net/p/linux-f2fs/mailman/message/36648641/)
> >
> > This series can also be retrieved from git at
> > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/ebiggers/xfstests-dev.git
> > branch "ciphertext-verification".
> >
> > I also have patches on top of this series which verify the ciphertext
> > produced from v2 encryption policies, which are proposed by my kernel
> > patch series "fscrypt: key management improvements"
> > (https://patchwork.kernel.org/cover/10908107/). v2 encryption policies
> > will use a different key derivation function, and thus their ciphertext
> > will be different. These additional patches can be found at branch
> > "fscrypt-key-mgmt-improvements" of my git repo above. But I've arranged
> > things such that this shorter series can potentially be applied earlier,
> > to test what's in the kernel now.
> >
> > Eric Biggers (7):
> > common/encrypt: introduce helpers for set_encpolicy and get_encpolicy
> > fscrypt-crypt-util: add utility for reproducing fscrypt encrypted data
> > common/encrypt: support requiring other encryption settings
> > common/encrypt: add helper for ciphertext verification tests
> > generic: verify ciphertext of v1 encryption policies with AES-256
> > generic: verify ciphertext of v1 encryption policies with AES-128
> > generic: verify ciphertext of v1 encryption policies with Adiantum
> >
> > .gitignore | 1 +
> > common/encrypt | 482 ++++++++++-
> > src/Makefile | 3 +-
> > src/fscrypt-crypt-util.c | 1645 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > tests/ext4/024 | 3 +-
> > tests/generic/395 | 28 +-
> > tests/generic/395.out | 2 +-
> > tests/generic/396 | 15 +-
> > tests/generic/397 | 3 +-
> > tests/generic/398 | 5 +-
> > tests/generic/399 | 3 +-
> > tests/generic/419 | 3 +-
> > tests/generic/421 | 3 +-
> > tests/generic/429 | 3 +-
> > tests/generic/435 | 3 +-
> > tests/generic/440 | 5 +-
> > tests/generic/700 | 41 +
> > tests/generic/700.out | 5 +
> > tests/generic/701 | 41 +
> > tests/generic/701.out | 5 +
> > tests/generic/702 | 43 +
> > tests/generic/702.out | 10 +
> > tests/generic/group | 3 +
> > 23 files changed, 2308 insertions(+), 47 deletions(-)
> > create mode 100644 src/fscrypt-crypt-util.c
> > create mode 100755 tests/generic/700
> > create mode 100644 tests/generic/700.out
> > create mode 100755 tests/generic/701
> > create mode 100644 tests/generic/701.out
> > create mode 100755 tests/generic/702
> > create mode 100644 tests/generic/702.out
> >
> > --
> > 2.21.0.593.g511ec345e18-goog
> >
>
> Any comments on this?
Sorry for the late review, I went through the patches and they look fine
to me over all from fstests perspective, I replied a few minor issues to
individual patches.
It'd be great if ext4 and/or f2fs folks could help review the tests as
well.
Thanks,
Eryu
>
> FYI, the e2fsprogs patch that these tests need was applied.
>
> I'm still waiting for the f2fs-tools patch.
>
> - Eric
Powered by blists - more mailing lists