linux-ext4 - Re: [PATCH v7 07/16] fscrypt: add FS_IOC_REMOVE_ENCRYPTION

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Message-ID: <20190801184646.GB223822@gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 1 Aug 2019 11:46:47 -0700
From:   Eric Biggers <ebiggers@...nel.org>
To:     "Theodore Y. Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>, linux-fscrypt@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-f2fs-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net,
        linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org, linux-api@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org, keyrings@...r.kernel.org,
        Paul Crowley <paulcrowley@...gle.com>,
        Satya Tangirala <satyat@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 07/16] fscrypt: add FS_IOC_REMOVE_ENCRYPTION_KEY ioctl

On Thu, Aug 01, 2019 at 11:35:56AM -0700, Eric Biggers wrote:
> 
> "fscrypt lock" actually doesn't exist yet; it's a missing feature.  My patch to
> the fscrypt tool adds it.  So we get to decide on the semantics.  We don't want
> to require root, though; so for v2 policy keys, the real semantics have to be
> that "fscrypt lock" registers the key for the user, and "fscrypt unlock"
> unregisters it for the user.
> 

I meant the other way around, of course: "fscrypt unlock" registers the key for
the user, and "fscrypt lock" unregisters it for the user.

- Eric