From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 48B7CC4338F for ; Fri, 20 Aug 2021 21:19:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 285B361130 for ; Fri, 20 Aug 2021 21:19:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S240615AbhHTVU2 (ORCPT ); Fri, 20 Aug 2021 17:20:28 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:45622 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S239997AbhHTVU1 (ORCPT ); Fri, 20 Aug 2021 17:20:27 -0400 Received: from mail-pf1-x434.google.com (mail-pf1-x434.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::434]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B2FE9C061756 for ; Fri, 20 Aug 2021 14:19:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pf1-x434.google.com with SMTP id 18so9718204pfh.9 for ; Fri, 20 Aug 2021 14:19:49 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gateworks-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=xBTMAWGQBBiObCm1jTl9uvsUH1RWm/SH7P0VcEqIt98=; b=Oe4UKgd1fXOxRlRf3wPkglvi1/jg5q68upuxv0zakaw9OzDI+FudmRHI+xn7RoE4Xb tqxIpnDZIgs5xNQE19SP58rJ4IozRaPALfH9vfjcVlrjaNQUIm6IGSZYrdzW8q26UfQH 8gLc04P5xB2dQHVWn0YKcfGYsU9j4i9bf/q+AvLE0Mi+rlIdsBI8ZZxfroJlFuHdQ7b5 q11PpX5cHPvU/dkEsD/w/GkK1Lf0evUIPRzJHt4BRCAuZ5beNEhf9Vcru5asv034o21C ZNQb65yILae8Uha7B7BA/M6gHRDih42F78ydMsomD+jya70EErQ/jU/wnbaCJsoGTZEx azQQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=xBTMAWGQBBiObCm1jTl9uvsUH1RWm/SH7P0VcEqIt98=; b=gPles8keRG6p7qtFsw6tckBVheIg2F1VhSpqx4S2l86dHCPqInPfZpscR/gkC58FEN Iqblkl4FoOhD7shV35A4PsmXX4BbOClrGv/yJ6uUq26x9ewvXi0TAyerPOXX4bp/lE+q KQ10z9VyODkvlxCYRqeO14ZacodVwaEZdRzJnuM8p0tzLxbrVX65qXybzWuw2+oTSb4w /UOs695dtebwtqAp/SOsM12J7AXRm+8Dw7iS1Cwbb3v3BU9C4BEFGjCw8KEydXTt37hg yTCikkTyiOcGKYwvrR28d56yn7SIb2V02Pf7ur9/RkAgIbcZltcJHw2ZQr6VEN+MALN6 cdvg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533A2gQrJXW6bODLGJzNFuSJyZE2SSnJdUSDQI6zGKem6HzYXJv/ NoD042BQP5bfg0DmNW2J1xwMdRziZXKCtz+PjDk5Ng== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzD06fzioZkY4v4ZMjF8wZri1QRL6xum4iAtOOc6AOx8ZTf941G2JYybtFiZ6JLyej0b/tnWBpmrax13726ZzQ= X-Received: by 2002:a63:db4a:: with SMTP id x10mr6624779pgi.30.1629494389132; Fri, 20 Aug 2021 14:19:49 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <2b48a848-d70b-9c43-5ca0-9ab72622ed12@pengutronix.de> <9200d46d-94a2-befd-e9b0-93036e56eb8a@pengutronix.de> In-Reply-To: <9200d46d-94a2-befd-e9b0-93036e56eb8a@pengutronix.de> From: Tim Harvey Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2021 14:19:37 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] KEYS: trusted: Introduce support for NXP CAAM-based trusted keys To: Ahmad Fatoum Cc: David Gstir , Aymen Sghaier , Mimi Zohar , Jan Luebbe , keyrings@vger.kernel.org, Steffen Trumtrar , linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, Udit Agarwal , Herbert Xu , =?UTF-8?Q?Horia_Geant=C4=83?= , Richard Weinberger , James Morris , Eric Biggers , "Serge E. Hallyn" , Sumit Garg , James Bottomley , Franck LENORMAND , David Howells , open list , Jarkko Sakkinen , linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org, Sascha Hauer , linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org, "David S. Miller" Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Aug 20, 2021 at 1:36 PM Ahmad Fatoum wrote: > > On 20.08.21 22:20, Tim Harvey wrote: > > On Fri, Aug 20, 2021 at 9:20 AM Ahmad Fatoum wrote: > >> On 20.08.21 17:39, Tim Harvey wrote: > >>> Thanks for your work! > >>> > >>> I've been asked to integrate the capability of using CAAM to > >>> blob/deblob data to an older 5.4 kernel such as NXP's downstream > >>> vendor kernel does [1] and I'm trying to understand how your series > >>> works. I'm not at all familiar with the Linux Key Management API's or > >>> trusted keys. Can you provide an example of how this can be used for > >>> such a thing? > >> > >> Here's an example with dm-crypt: > >> > >> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-integrity/5d44e50e-4309-830b-79f6-f5d888b1ef69@pengutronix.de/ > >> > >> dm-crypt is a bit special at the moment, because it has direct support for > >> trusted keys. For interfacing with other parts of the kernel like ecryptfs > >> or EVM, you have to create encrypted keys rooted to the trusted keys and use > >> those. The kernel documentation has an example: > >> > >> https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/v5.13/security/keys/trusted-encrypted.html > >> > >> If you backport this series, you can include the typo fix spotted by David. > >> > >> I'll send out a revised series, but given that a regression fix I want to > >> rebase on hasn't been picked up for 3 weeks now, I am not in a hurry. > >> > > Thanks for the reference. > > > > I'm still trying to understand the keyctl integration with caam. For > > the 'data' param to keyctl you are using tings like 'new ' and > > 'load '. Where are these 'commands' identified? > > Search for match_table_t in security/keys/trusted-keys/trusted_core.c > > > I may still be missing something. I'm using 4.14-rc6 with your series > > and seeing the following: > > That's an odd version to backport stuff to.. > > > # cat /proc/cmdline > > trusted.source=caam > > # keyctl add trusted mykey 'new 32' @s)# create new trusted key named > > 'mykey' of 32 bytes in the session keyring > > 480104283 > > # keyctl print 480104283 # dump the key > > keyctl_read_alloc: Unknown error 126 > > ^^^ not clear what this is > > Not sure what returns -ENOKEY for you. I haven't been using trusted > keys on v4.14, but you can try tracing the keyctl syscall. yikes... that would be painful. I typo'd and meant 5.14-rc6 :) I'm working with mainline first to make sure I understand everything. If I backport this it would be to 5.4 but that looks to be extremely painful. It looks like there was a lot of activity around trusted keys in 5.13. It works for a user keyring but not a session keyring... does that explain anything? # keyctl add trusted mykey 'new 32' @u 941210782 # keyctl print 941210782 83b7845cb45216496aead9ee2c6a406f587d64aad47bddc539d8947a247e618798d9306b36398b5dc2722a4c3f220a3a763ee175f6bd64758fdd49ca4db597e8ce328121b60edbba9b8d8d55056be896 # keyctl add trusted mykey 'new 32' @s 310571960 # keyctl print 310571960 keyctl_read_alloc: Unknown error 126 Sorry, I'm still trying to wrap my head around the differences in keyrings and trusted vs user keys. Tim