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
| ||
|
Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2010 21:23:33 +0000 From: David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com> To: Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> Cc: dhowells@...hat.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org, keyrings@...ux-nfs.org, linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org, Jason Gunthorpe <jgunthorpe@...idianresearch.com>, James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>, David Safford <safford@...son.ibm.com>, Rajiv Andrade <srajiv@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>, Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ibm.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH v1.3 4/4] keys: add new key-type encrypted Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote: > > Why do you allow the master key to be supplied by a user-defined key rather > > than requiring a trusted-key unconditionally? > > This is for systems without a TPM. The logic needs to exist, whether it > is here or in EVM. By doing it here, a user could provide a passphrase > in the initramfs, which is used to decrypt the encrypted key. I thought that might be the case. In which case, it might be better to allow someone to add a trusted key, supplying both encrypted and unencrypted versions of the data so that the TPM need not be consulted. You might want to mark such a key so that it can be seen when it is dumped. But if you're going to use a user-defined key, you really need to prefix the description with something suitable. David -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists