From: Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at>
To: Amir Goldstein <amir73il@gmail.com>
Cc: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu>,
linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-fscrypt@vger.kernel.org,
overlayfs <linux-unionfs@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Paul Lawrence <paullawrence@google.com>
Subject: Re: overlayfs vs. fscrypt
Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2019 21:33:10 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <15244624.W7e5yEypHC@blindfold> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAOQ4uxhqQKzriL0An4Tvzc1E_LffL-z9q1otOW_RdD1ZdKWP3Q@mail.gmail.com>
Am Mittwoch, 13. März 2019, 15:26:54 CET schrieb Amir Goldstein:
> IMO, the best thing for UBIFS to do would be to modify fscrypt to support
> opting out of the revalidate behavior, IWO, sanitize your hack to an API.
Given the WTF/s rate this thread has, this might me a good option.
Actually people already asked me how to disable this feature because
they saw no use of it.
Being able to delete encrypted files looks good on the feature list but in
reality it has very few users but causes confusion, IMHO.
I propose a new fscrypt_operations flag, FS_CFLG_NO_CRYPT_FNAMES.
If this flag is set, a) fscrypt_setup_filename() will return -EPERM if
no key is found.
And b) __fscrypt_prepare_lookup() will not attach fscrypt_d_ops to the dentry.
Eric, what do you think?
Thanks,
//richard
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at>
To: Amir Goldstein <amir73il@gmail.com>
Cc: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu>,
linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-fscrypt@vger.kernel.org,
overlayfs <linux-unionfs@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Paul Lawrence <paullawrence@google.com>
Subject: Re: overlayfs vs. fscrypt
Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2019 21:33:10 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <15244624.W7e5yEypHC@blindfold> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAOQ4uxhqQKzriL0An4Tvzc1E_LffL-z9q1otOW_RdD1ZdKWP3Q@mail.gmail.com>
Am Mittwoch, 13. M�rz 2019, 15:26:54 CET schrieb Amir Goldstein:
> IMO, the best thing for UBIFS to do would be to modify fscrypt to support
> opting out of the revalidate behavior, IWO, sanitize your hack to an API.
Given the WTF/s rate this thread has, this might me a good option.
Actually people already asked me how to disable this feature because
they saw no use of it.
Being able to delete encrypted files looks good on the feature list but in
reality it has very few users but causes confusion, IMHO.
I propose a new fscrypt_operations flag, FS_CFLG_NO_CRYPT_FNAMES.
If this flag is set, a) fscrypt_setup_filename() will return -EPERM if
no key is found.
And b) __fscrypt_prepare_lookup() will not attach fscrypt_d_ops to the dentry.
Eric, what do you think?
Thanks,
//richard
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-03-13 20:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 76+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-03-13 12:31 overlayfs vs. fscrypt Richard Weinberger
2019-03-13 12:31 ` Richard Weinberger
2019-03-13 12:36 ` Miklos Szeredi
2019-03-13 12:47 ` Richard Weinberger
2019-03-13 12:47 ` Richard Weinberger
2019-03-13 12:58 ` Miklos Szeredi
2019-03-13 13:00 ` Richard Weinberger
2019-03-13 13:00 ` Richard Weinberger
2019-03-13 13:24 ` Miklos Szeredi
2019-03-13 13:32 ` Richard Weinberger
2019-03-13 13:32 ` Richard Weinberger
2019-03-13 14:26 ` Amir Goldstein
2019-03-13 15:16 ` Theodore Ts'o
2019-03-13 15:30 ` Richard Weinberger
2019-03-13 15:30 ` Richard Weinberger
2019-03-13 15:36 ` James Bottomley
2019-03-13 15:51 ` Eric Biggers
2019-03-13 16:13 ` James Bottomley
2019-03-13 16:24 ` Richard Weinberger
2019-03-13 16:44 ` Theodore Ts'o
2019-03-13 17:45 ` James Bottomley
2019-03-13 18:58 ` Theodore Ts'o
2019-03-13 19:17 ` James Bottomley
2019-03-13 19:57 ` Eric Biggers
2019-03-13 20:06 ` James Bottomley
2019-03-13 20:25 ` Eric Biggers
2019-03-13 21:04 ` James Bottomley
2019-03-13 22:13 ` Eric Biggers
2019-03-13 22:29 ` James Bottomley
2019-03-13 22:58 ` Eric Biggers
2019-03-13 16:06 ` Al Viro
2019-03-13 16:44 ` Eric Biggers
2019-03-13 19:19 ` Al Viro
2019-03-13 19:43 ` Eric Biggers
2019-03-13 15:30 ` Eric Biggers
2019-03-13 15:30 ` Eric Biggers
2019-03-13 20:33 ` Richard Weinberger [this message]
2019-03-13 20:33 ` Richard Weinberger
2019-03-13 22:26 ` Eric Biggers
2019-03-13 22:26 ` Eric Biggers
2019-03-13 22:42 ` Richard Weinberger
2019-03-14 7:34 ` Miklos Szeredi
2019-03-14 17:15 ` [RFC] fscrypt_key_required mount option Richard Weinberger
2019-03-14 17:15 ` Richard Weinberger
2019-03-14 17:15 ` [PATCH 1/4] fscrypt: Implement FS_CFLG_OWN_D_OPS Richard Weinberger
2019-03-14 17:15 ` Richard Weinberger
2019-03-14 17:15 ` [PATCH 2/4] fscrypt: Export fscrypt_d_ops Richard Weinberger
2019-03-14 17:15 ` Richard Weinberger
2019-03-14 17:15 ` [PATCH 3/4] ubifs: Simplify fscrypt_get_encryption_info() error handling Richard Weinberger
2019-03-14 17:15 ` Richard Weinberger
2019-03-14 17:15 ` [PATCH 4/4] ubifs: Implement new mount option, fscrypt_key_required Richard Weinberger
2019-03-14 17:15 ` Richard Weinberger
2019-03-14 17:49 ` Eric Biggers
2019-03-14 17:49 ` Eric Biggers
2019-03-14 20:54 ` Richard Weinberger
2019-03-14 20:54 ` Richard Weinberger
2019-03-14 23:07 ` Theodore Ts'o
2019-03-14 23:07 ` Theodore Ts'o
2019-03-15 0:26 ` Unsubscribe Shane Volpe
2019-03-15 7:48 ` [PATCH 4/4] ubifs: Implement new mount option, fscrypt_key_required Richard Weinberger
2019-03-15 7:48 ` Richard Weinberger
2019-03-15 13:51 ` Theodore Ts'o
2019-03-15 13:51 ` Theodore Ts'o
2019-03-15 13:51 ` Theodore Ts'o
2019-03-15 13:59 ` Richard Weinberger
2019-03-15 13:59 ` Richard Weinberger
2019-03-14 23:15 ` James Bottomley
2019-03-14 23:15 ` James Bottomley
2019-03-14 23:42 ` Theodore Ts'o
2019-03-14 23:42 ` Theodore Ts'o
2019-03-14 23:55 ` James Bottomley
2019-03-14 23:55 ` James Bottomley
2019-03-13 15:01 ` overlayfs vs. fscrypt Eric Biggers
2019-03-13 15:01 ` Eric Biggers
2019-03-13 16:11 ` Al Viro
2019-03-13 16:33 ` Eric Biggers
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=15244624.W7e5yEypHC@blindfold \
--to=richard@nod.at \
--cc=amir73il@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-fscrypt@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-unionfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=miklos@szeredi.hu \
--cc=paullawrence@google.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.