linux-ext4 - Re: [PATCH 1/3] fscrypt: add support for inline-encryption-optimized policies

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:   Wed, 23 Oct 2019 18:27:59 -0700
From:   Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To:     "Theodore Y. Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>
Cc:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
        Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>,
        linux-fscrypt@...r.kernel.org, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-f2fs-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net,
        linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, Satya Tangirala <satyat@...gle.com>,
        Paul Crowley <paulcrowley@...gle.com>,
        Paul Lawrence <paullawrence@...gle.com>,
        Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] fscrypt: add support for inline-encryption-optimized
 policies

> If and when the vaporware shows up in real hardware, and assuming that
> fscrypt is useful for this hardware, we can name it
> "super_duper_fancy_inline_crypto".  :-)

I think you are entirely missing the point.  The point is that naming
the option someting related to inline encryption is fundamentally
wrong.  It is related to a limitation of existing inline crypto
engines, not related to the fudamental model.  And all the other
rambling below don't matter either.