[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1289940233.2627.31.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2010 15:43:53 -0500
From: Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
Cc: 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
On Tue, 2010-11-16 at 17:50 +0000, David Howells wrote:
> Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
>
> > I actually like keyctl requiring 'trusted:' or 'user:'. Forcing the
> > user to indicate which type of key they want, is actually good - no
> > misunderstandings.
>
> You still need to prefix the description of a user-defined key so that you
> don't collide with other people who're also using user-defined keys for random things.
Although I previously agreed to this change, I'm really not convinced it
is necessary. encrypted keys don't create new trusted or user keys,
they only use existing keys to encrypt/decrypt encrypted
keys(instantiate,read). Key names, user or otherwise, should be left up
to the person creating them.
thanks,
Mimi
--
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