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 PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Sat, 15 Jun 2019 11:31:12 -0400 From: "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@....edu> To: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@...nel.org> Cc: linux-fscrypt@...r.kernel.org, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org, linux-f2fs-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-api@...r.kernel.org, linux-integrity@...r.kernel.org, Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk@...nel.org>, Victor Hsieh <victorhsieh@...gle.com>, Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>, "Darrick J . Wong" <darrick.wong@...cle.com>, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 14/16] ext4: add basic fs-verity support On Thu, Jun 06, 2019 at 08:52:03AM -0700, Eric Biggers wrote: > +/* > + * Format of ext4 verity xattr. This points to the location of the verity > + * descriptor within the file data rather than containing it directly because > + * the verity descriptor *must* be encrypted when ext4 encryption is used. But, > + * ext4 encryption does not encrypt xattrs. > + */ > +struct fsverity_descriptor_location { > + __le32 version; > + __le32 size; > + __le64 pos; > +}; What's the benefit of storing the location in an xattr as opposed to just keying it off the end of i_size, rounded up to next page size (or 64k) as I had suggested earlier? Using an xattr burns xattr space, which is a limited resource, and it adds some additional code complexity. Does the benefits outweigh the added complexity? - Ted
Powered by blists - more mailing lists