Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Message-ID: <1564883160.11223.103.camel@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] KEYS: trusted: allow module init if TPM is inactive or
 deactivated
From:   Mimi Zohar <zohar@kernel.org>
To:     Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com>,
        Tyler Hicks <tyhicks@canonical.com>
Cc:     Roberto Sassu <roberto.sassu@huawei.com>, jejb@linux.ibm.com,
        jgg@ziepe.ca, linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, keyrings@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, crazyt2019+lml@gmail.com,
        nayna@linux.vnet.ibm.com, silviu.vlasceanu@huawei.com
Date:   Sat, 03 Aug 2019 21:46:00 -0400
In-Reply-To: <aff3502c598fb76a1517795edaacd8c8ea330051.camel@linux.intel.com>
References: <20190705163735.11539-1-roberto.sassu@huawei.com>
         <20190711194811.rfsohbfc3a7carpa@linux.intel.com>
         <b4454a78-1f1b-cc75-114a-99926e097b05@huawei.com>
         <20190801163215.mfkagoafkxscesne@linux.intel.com>
         <e50c4cfa-1f0c-6f4d-1910-010a8d874393@huawei.com>
         <20190802142721.GA26616@elm>
         <20190802194226.oiztvme5klkmw6fh@linux.intel.com>
         <20190802202343.GE26616@elm>
         <aff3502c598fb76a1517795edaacd8c8ea330051.camel@linux.intel.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Sat, 2019-08-03 at 17:44 +0300, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> On Fri, 2019-08-02 at 15:23 -0500, Tyler Hicks wrote:
> > That wasn't the conclusion that I came to. I prefer Robert's proposed
> > change to trusted.ko.
> > 
> > How do you propose that this be fixed in eCryptfs?
> > 
> > Removing encrypted_key support from eCryptfs is the only way that I can
> > see to fix the bug in eCryptfs. That support has been there since 2011.
> > I'm not sure of the number of users that would be broken by removing
> > encrypted_key support. I don't think the number is high but I can't say
> > that confidently.
> 
> Looking at the documentation [1] it is stated that
> 
> "Encrypted keys do not depend on a TPM, and are faster, as they use AES
> for encryption/decryption."
> 
> Why would you need to remove support for encrypted keys? Isn't it a
> regression in encrypted keys to hard depend on trusted keys given
> what the documentation says?

"Encrypted" key are symmetric keys, which are encrypted/decrypted
either by a "trusted" key or, for development purposes only, a "user"
key.

Mimi