linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/6] security/keys/encrypted: Clean up request_trusted

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]

Message-ID: <CAPcyv4gySHayfwtp1PgxEoM-T_s_1A4RTcnXefx5iRLn9g=D5w@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 19 Mar 2019 22:48:11 -0700
From:   Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
To:     Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.ibm.com>
Cc:     keyrings@...r.kernel.org, James Bottomley <jejb@...ux.ibm.com>,
        David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
        Vishal L Verma <vishal.l.verma@...el.com>,
        linux-nvdimm <linux-nvdimm@...ts.01.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/6] security/keys/encrypted: Clean up request_trusted_key()

On Tue, Mar 19, 2019 at 7:36 PM Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.ibm.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, 2019-03-19 at 17:20 -0700, Dan Williams wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 19, 2019 at 5:07 PM Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.ibm.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Mon, 2019-03-18 at 23:06 -0700, Dan Williams wrote:
> > >
> > > < snip >
> > >
> > > > +/*
> > > > + * request_trusted_key - request the trusted key
> > > > + *
> > > > + * Trusted keys are sealed to PCRs and other metadata. Although userspace
> > > > + * manages both trusted/encrypted key-types, like the encrypted key type
> > > > + * data, trusted key type data is not visible decrypted from userspace.
> > > > + */
> > > > +static struct key *request_trusted_key(const char *trusted_desc,
> > > > +                             const u8 **master_key, size_t *master_keylen)
> > > > +{
> > > > +     struct trusted_key_payload *tpayload;
> > > > +     struct key_type *type;
> > > > +     struct key *tkey;
> > > > +
> > > > +     type = key_type_lookup("trusted");
> > >
> > > The associated key_type_put() will need to be called.
> >
> > Yes.
>
> I don't know if defining a key_type_lookup() wrapper, perhaps named
> is_key_type_available(), would help.  Both key_type_lookup() and
> key_type_put() would be called.  The existing code could then remain
> the same.
>

Maybe, but something still needs to pin the hosting module. I think
this means that the first call to key_type->instantiate() pins the
hosting module, and the ->destroy() of the last key for the key_type
unpins the module. It does mean that the ->destroy() method is no
longer optional.