[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1532349756.4604.85.camel@pengutronix.de>
Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2018 14:42:36 +0200
From: Jan Lübbe <jlu@...gutronix.de>
To: Udit Agarwal <udit.agarwal@....com>,
"dhowells@...hat.com" <dhowells@...hat.com>,
"zohar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com" <zohar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
"jmorris@...ei.org" <jmorris@...ei.org>,
"serge@...lyn.com" <serge@...lyn.com>,
"linux-integrity@...r.kernel.org" <linux-integrity@...r.kernel.org>,
"keyrings@...r.kernel.org" <keyrings@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org"
<linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Cc: Sahil Malhotra <sahil.malhotra@....com>,
Ruchika Gupta <ruchika.gupta@....com>,
Horia Geanta <horia.geanta@....com>,
Aymen Sghaier <aymen.sghaier@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] security/keys/secure_key: Adds the secure key
support based on CAAM.
Hi,
On Sat, 2018-07-21 at 14:44 +0000, Udit Agarwal wrote:
> Thanks for sharing the documentation changes and feedback.
>
> Below are the answers to the questions:
>
> 1. Currently the secure key patch series has been added to support
> only data blobs.
> It is not supporting key blobs as of now, we have thought of adding
> that support in future.
OK. Do have a plan how the key blobs would be represented in the
keyring? It seems it would need to be some sort of handle instead of
the key data. Would it need a different userspace API?
> 2. Yes secure keys could also be implemented using OPTEE. I will
> change the documentation in next patch version.
Thanks!
Jan
Powered by blists - more mailing lists