On Fri, 2010-11-12 at 21:23 +0000, David Howells wrote:
> Mimi Zohar <zo...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
>
> > > Why do you allow the master key to be supplied by a user-defined key
> > > rather
> > > than requiring a trusted-key unconditionally?
> >
> > This is for systems without a TPM. The logic needs to exist, whether it
> > is here or in EVM. By doing it here, a user could provide a passphrase
> > in the initramfs, which is used to decrypt the encrypted key.
>
> I thought that might be the case. In which case, it might be better to allow
> someone to add a trusted key, supplying both encrypted and unencrypted
> versions of the data so that the TPM need not be consulted. You might want to
> mark such a key so that it can be seen when it is dumped.
At least to me, the name 'trusted' implies some form of HW.
> But if you're going to use a user-defined key, you really need to prefix the
> description with something suitable.
>
> David
Agreed. So instead of:
keyctl add encrypted name "new master-key-name keylen" ring
the description would be prefixed with the key type like:
keyctl add encrypted name "new trusted|user master-key-name keylen" ring
thanks,
Mimi
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-crypto" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
