From: Mimi Zohar Subject: Re: [PATCH v1.3 4/4] keys: add new key-type encrypted Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2010 15:43:53 -0500 Message-ID: <1289940233.2627.31.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1289918320.3188.16.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1289849751.3027.17.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1289694826.3257.82.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1289595738.2731.80.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1289404309-15955-5-git-send-email-zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <1289404309-15955-1-git-send-email-zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <26689.1289591135@redhat.com> <27900.1289597013@redhat.com> <8268.1289837934@redhat.com> <23151.1289916524@redhat.com> <26645.1289929851@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, keyrings@linux-nfs.org, linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org, Jason Gunthorpe , James Morris , David Safford , Rajiv Andrade , Mimi Zohar To: David Howells Return-path: In-Reply-To: <26645.1289929851@redhat.com> Sender: linux-security-module-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-crypto.vger.kernel.org On Tue, 2010-11-16 at 17:50 +0000, David Howells wrote: > Mimi Zohar 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