aboutsummaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/Documentation/filesystems/fscrypt.rst
AgeCommit message (Collapse)AuthorFilesLines
2026-01-12fscrypt: Drop obsolete recommendation to enable optimized NHPoly1305Eric Biggers1-5/+0
CONFIG_CRYPTO_NHPOLY1305_NEON, CONFIG_CRYPTO_NHPOLY1305_SSE2, and CONFIG_CRYPTO_NHPOLY1305_AVX2 no longer exist. The equivalent optimizations are now just enabled automatically when Adiantum support is enabled. Update the fscrypt documentation accordingly. Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20251211011846.8179-13-ebiggers@kernel.org Signed-off-by: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@kernel.org>
2025-11-11fscrypt: Drop obsolete recommendation to enable optimized POLYVALEric Biggers1-2/+0
CONFIG_CRYPTO_POLYVAL_ARM64_CE and CONFIG_CRYPTO_POLYVAL_CLMUL_NI no longer exist. The architecture-optimized POLYVAL code is now just enabled automatically when HCTR2 support is enabled. Update the fscrypt documentation accordingly. Reviewed-by: Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@kernel.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20251109234726.638437-10-ebiggers@kernel.org Signed-off-by: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@kernel.org>
2025-07-04fscrypt: Don't use problematic non-inline crypto enginesEric Biggers1-22/+15
Make fscrypt no longer use Crypto API drivers for non-inline crypto engines, even when the Crypto API prioritizes them over CPU-based code (which unfortunately it often does). These drivers tend to be really problematic, especially for fscrypt's workload. This commit has no effect on inline crypto engines, which are different and do work well. Specifically, exclude drivers that have CRYPTO_ALG_KERN_DRIVER_ONLY or CRYPTO_ALG_ALLOCATES_MEMORY set. (Later, CRYPTO_ALG_ASYNC should be excluded too. That's omitted for now to keep this commit backportable, since until recently some CPU-based code had CRYPTO_ALG_ASYNC set.) There are two major issues with these drivers: bugs and performance. First, these drivers tend to be buggy. They're fundamentally much more error-prone and harder to test than the CPU-based code. They often don't get tested before kernel releases, and even if they do, the crypto self-tests don't properly test these drivers. Released drivers have en/decrypted or hashed data incorrectly. These bugs cause issues for fscrypt users who often didn't even want to use these drivers, e.g.: - https://github.com/google/fscryptctl/issues/32 - https://github.com/google/fscryptctl/issues/9 - https://lore.kernel.org/r/PH0PR02MB731916ECDB6C613665863B6CFFAA2@PH0PR02MB7319.namprd02.prod.outlook.com These drivers have also similarly caused issues for dm-crypt users, including data corruption and deadlocks. Since Linux v5.10, dm-crypt has disabled most of them by excluding CRYPTO_ALG_ALLOCATES_MEMORY. Second, these drivers tend to be *much* slower than the CPU-based code. This may seem counterintuitive, but benchmarks clearly show it. There's a *lot* of overhead associated with going to a hardware driver, off the CPU, and back again. To prove this, I gathered as many systems with this type of crypto engine as I could, and I measured synchronous encryption of 4096-byte messages (which matches fscrypt's workload): Intel Emerald Rapids server: AES-256-XTS: xts-aes-vaes-avx512 16171 MB/s [CPU-based, Vector AES] qat_aes_xts 289 MB/s [Offload, Intel QuickAssist] Qualcomm SM8650 HDK: AES-256-XTS: xts-aes-ce 4301 MB/s [CPU-based, ARMv8 Crypto Extensions] xts-aes-qce 73 MB/s [Offload, Qualcomm Crypto Engine] i.MX 8M Nano LPDDR4 EVK: AES-256-XTS: xts-aes-ce 647 MB/s [CPU-based, ARMv8 Crypto Extensions] xts(ecb-aes-caam) 20 MB/s [Offload, CAAM] AES-128-CBC-ESSIV: essiv(cbc-aes-caam,sha256-lib) 23 MB/s [Offload, CAAM] STM32MP157F-DK2: AES-256-XTS: xts-aes-neonbs 13.2 MB/s [CPU-based, ARM NEON] xts(stm32-ecb-aes) 3.1 MB/s [Offload, STM32 crypto engine] AES-128-CBC-ESSIV: essiv(cbc-aes-neonbs,sha256-lib) 14.7 MB/s [CPU-based, ARM NEON] essiv(stm32-cbc-aes,sha256-lib) 3.2 MB/s [Offload, STM32 crypto engine] Adiantum: adiantum(xchacha12-arm,aes-arm,nhpoly1305-neon) 52.8 MB/s [CPU-based, ARM scalar + NEON] So, there was no case in which the crypto engine was even *close* to being faster. On the first three, which have AES instructions in the CPU, the CPU was 30 to 55 times faster (!). Even on STM32MP157F-DK2 which has a Cortex-A7 CPU that doesn't have AES instructions, AES was over 4 times faster on the CPU. And Adiantum encryption, which is what actually should be used on CPUs like that, was over 17 times faster. Other justifications that have been given for these non-inline crypto engines (almost always coming from the hardware vendors, not actual users) don't seem very plausible either: - The crypto engine throughput could be improved by processing multiple requests concurrently. Currently irrelevant to fscrypt, since it doesn't do that. This would also be complex, and unhelpful in many cases. 2 of the 4 engines I tested even had only one queue. - Some of the engines, e.g. STM32, support hardware keys. Also currently irrelevant to fscrypt, since it doesn't support these. Interestingly, the STM32 driver itself doesn't support this either. - Free up CPU for other tasks and/or reduce energy usage. Not very plausible considering the "short" message length, driver overhead, and scheduling overhead. There's just very little time for the CPU to do something else like run another task or enter low-power state, before the message finishes and it's time to process the next one. - Some of these engines resist power analysis and electromagnetic attacks, while the CPU-based crypto generally does not. In theory, this sounds great. In practice, if this benefit requires the use of an off-CPU offload that massively regresses performance and has a low-quality, buggy driver, the price for this hardening (which is not relevant to most fscrypt users, and tends to be incomplete) is just too high. Inline crypto engines are much more promising here, as are on-CPU solutions like RISC-V High Assurance Cryptography. Fixes: b30ab0e03407 ("ext4 crypto: add ext4 encryption facilities") Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org Acked-by: Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@kernel.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20250704070322.20692-1-ebiggers@kernel.org Signed-off-by: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@kernel.org>
2025-07-04fscrypt: Drop obsolete recommendation to enable optimized SHA-512Eric Biggers1-8/+0
Since the crypto kconfig options are being fixed to enable optimized SHA-512 automatically (https://lore.kernel.org/linux-crypto/20250616014019.415791-1-ebiggers@kernel.org/), it is no longer necessary to give a recommendation to enable it. Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20250619193149.138315-1-ebiggers@kernel.org Signed-off-by: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@kernel.org>
2025-05-26Merge tag 'fscrypt-for-linus' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/fs/fscrypt/linuxLinus Torvalds1-38/+149
Pull fscrypt update from Eric Biggers: "Add support for 'hardware-wrapped inline encryption keys' to fscrypt. When enabled on supported platforms, this feature protects file contents keys from certain attacks, such as cold boot attacks. This feature uses the block layer support for wrapped keys which was merged in 6.15. Wrapped key support has existed out-of-tree in Android for a long time, and it's finally ready for upstream now that there is a platform on which it works end-to-end with upstream. Specifically, it works on the Qualcomm SM8650 HDK, using the Qualcomm ICE (Inline Crypto Engine) and HWKM (Hardware Key Manager). The corresponding driver support is included in the SCSI tree for 6.16. Validation for this feature includes two new tests that were already merged into xfstests (generic/368 and generic/369)" * tag 'fscrypt-for-linus' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/fs/fscrypt/linux: fscrypt: add support for hardware-wrapped keys
2025-04-08fscrypt: add support for hardware-wrapped keysEric Biggers1-38/+149
Add support for hardware-wrapped keys to fscrypt. Such keys are protected from certain attacks, such as cold boot attacks. For more information, see the "Hardware-wrapped keys" section of Documentation/block/inline-encryption.rst. To support hardware-wrapped keys in fscrypt, we allow the fscrypt master keys to be hardware-wrapped. File contents encryption is done by passing the wrapped key to the inline encryption hardware via blk-crypto. Other fscrypt operations such as filenames encryption continue to be done by the kernel, using the "software secret" which the hardware derives. For more information, see the documentation which this patch adds to Documentation/filesystems/fscrypt.rst. Note that this feature doesn't require any filesystem-specific changes. However it does depend on inline encryption support, and thus currently it is only applicable to ext4 and f2fs. The version of this feature introduced by this patch is mostly equivalent to the version that has existed downstream in the Android Common Kernels since 2020. However, a couple fixes are included. First, the flags field in struct fscrypt_add_key_arg is now placed in the proper location. Second, key identifiers for HW-wrapped keys are now derived using a distinct HKDF context byte; this fixes a bug where a raw key could have the same identifier as a HW-wrapped key. Note that as a result of these fixes, the version of this feature introduced by this patch is not UAPI or on-disk format compatible with the version in the Android Common Kernels, though the divergence is limited to just those specific fixes. This version should be used going forwards. This patch has been heavily rewritten from the original version by Gaurav Kashyap <quic_gaurkash@quicinc.com> and Barani Muthukumaran <bmuthuku@codeaurora.org>. Tested-by: Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@linaro.org> # sm8650 Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20250404225859.172344-1-ebiggers@kernel.org Signed-off-by: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com>
2025-04-07fs: Remove aops->writepageMatthew Wilcox (Oracle)1-1/+1
All callers and implementations are now removed, so remove the operation and update the documentation to match. Signed-off-by: "Matthew Wilcox (Oracle)" <willy@infradead.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20250402150005.2309458-10-willy@infradead.org Signed-off-by: Christian Brauner <brauner@kernel.org>
2025-03-04fscrypt: mention init_on_free instead of page poisoningEric Biggers1-3/+2
Page poisoning is an older debug option. The modern way to initialize memory on free for security reasons is to set init_on_free=1. Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20250304210156.14912-1-ebiggers@kernel.org Signed-off-by: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com>
2025-03-04fscrypt: drop obsolete recommendation to enable optimized ChaCha20Eric Biggers1-3/+0
Since the crypto kconfig options are being fixed to enable optimized ChaCha20 automatically (https://lore.kernel.org/r/Z8AY16EIqAYpfmRI@gondor.apana.org.au/), it is no longer necessary to give a recommendation to enable it. Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20250304205501.13797-1-ebiggers@kernel.org Signed-off-by: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com>
2024-02-23fscrypt: write CBC-CTS instead of CTS-CBCEric Biggers1-12/+15
Calling CBC with ciphertext stealing "CBC-CTS" seems to be more common than calling it "CTS-CBC". E.g., CBC-CTS is used by OpenSSL, Crypto++, RFC3962, and RFC6803. The NIST SP800-38A addendum uses CBC-CS1, CBC-CS2, and CBC-CS3, distinguishing between different CTS conventions but similarly putting the CBC part first. In the interest of avoiding any idiosyncratic terminology, update the fscrypt documentation and the fscrypt_mode "friendly names" to align with the more common convention. Changing the "friendly names" only affects some log messages. The actual mode constants in the API are unchanged; those call it simply "CTS". Add a note to the documentation that clarifies that "CBC" and "CTS" in the API really mean CBC-ESSIV and CBC-CTS, respectively. Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20240224053550.44659-1-ebiggers@kernel.org Signed-off-by: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com>
2023-12-26fscrypt: document that CephFS supports fscrypt nowEric Biggers1-9/+9
The help text for CONFIG_FS_ENCRYPTION and the fscrypt.rst documentation file both list the filesystems that support fscrypt. CephFS added support for fscrypt in v6.6, so add CephFS to the list. Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20231227045158.87276-1-ebiggers@kernel.org Signed-off-by: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com>
2023-12-09fscrypt.rst: update definition of struct fscrypt_context_v2Eric Biggers1-1/+2
Get the copy of the fscrypt_context_v2 definition in the documentation in sync with the actual definition, which was changed recently by commit 5b1188847180 ("fscrypt: support crypto data unit size less than filesystem block size"). Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20231206001901.14371-1-ebiggers@kernel.org Signed-off-by: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com>
2023-10-16fscrypt: track master key presence separately from secretEric Biggers1-2/+2
Master keys can be in one of three states: present, incompletely removed, and absent (as per FSCRYPT_KEY_STATUS_* used in the UAPI). Currently, the way that "present" is distinguished from "incompletely removed" internally is by whether ->mk_secret exists or not. With extent-based encryption, it will be necessary to allow per-extent keys to be derived while the master key is incompletely removed, so that I/O on open files will reliably continue working after removal of the key has been initiated. (We could allow I/O to sometimes fail in that case, but that seems problematic for reasons such as writes getting silently thrown away and diverging from the existing fscrypt semantics.) Therefore, when the filesystem is using extent-based encryption, ->mk_secret can't be wiped when the key becomes incompletely removed. As a prerequisite for doing that, this patch makes the "present" state be tracked using a new field, ->mk_present. No behavior is changed yet. The basic idea here is borrowed from Josef Bacik's patch "fscrypt: use a flag to indicate that the master key is being evicted" (https://lore.kernel.org/r/e86c16dddc049ff065f877d793ad773e4c6bfad9.1696970227.git.josef@toxicpanda.com). I reimplemented it using a "present" bool instead of an "evicted" flag, fixed a couple bugs, and tried to update everything to be consistent. Note: I considered adding a ->mk_status field instead, holding one of FSCRYPT_KEY_STATUS_*. At first that seemed nice, but it ended up being more complex (despite simplifying FS_IOC_GET_ENCRYPTION_KEY_STATUS), since it would have introduced redundancy and had weird locking rules. Reviewed-by: Neal Gompa <neal@gompa.dev> Reviewed-by: Josef Bacik <josef@toxicpanda.com> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20231015061055.62673-1-ebiggers@kernel.org Signed-off-by: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com>
2023-09-25fscrypt: support crypto data unit size less than filesystem block sizeEric Biggers1-31/+86
Until now, fscrypt has always used the filesystem block size as the granularity of file contents encryption. Two scenarios have come up where a sub-block granularity of contents encryption would be useful: 1. Inline crypto hardware that only supports a crypto data unit size that is less than the filesystem block size. 2. Support for direct I/O at a granularity less than the filesystem block size, for example at the block device's logical block size in order to match the traditional direct I/O alignment requirement. (1) first came up with older eMMC inline crypto hardware that only supports a crypto data unit size of 512 bytes. That specific case ultimately went away because all systems with that hardware continued using out of tree code and never actually upgraded to the upstream inline crypto framework. But, now it's coming back in a new way: some current UFS controllers only support a data unit size of 4096 bytes, and there is a proposal to increase the filesystem block size to 16K. (2) was discussed as a "nice to have" feature, though not essential, when support for direct I/O on encrypted files was being upstreamed. Still, the fact that this feature has come up several times does suggest it would be wise to have available. Therefore, this patch implements it by using one of the reserved bytes in fscrypt_policy_v2 to allow users to select a sub-block data unit size. Supported data unit sizes are powers of 2 between 512 and the filesystem block size, inclusively. Support is implemented for both the FS-layer and inline crypto cases. This patch focuses on the basic support for sub-block data units. Some things are out of scope for this patch but may be addressed later: - Supporting sub-block data units in combination with FSCRYPT_POLICY_FLAG_IV_INO_LBLK_64, in most cases. Unfortunately this combination usually causes data unit indices to exceed 32 bits, and thus fscrypt_supported_policy() correctly disallows it. The users who potentially need this combination are using f2fs. To support it, f2fs would need to provide an option to slightly reduce its max file size. - Supporting sub-block data units in combination with FSCRYPT_POLICY_FLAG_IV_INO_LBLK_32. This has the same problem described above, but also it will need special code to make DUN wraparound still happen on a FS block boundary. - Supporting use case (2) mentioned above. The encrypted direct I/O code will need to stop requiring and assuming FS block alignment. This won't be hard, but it belongs in a separate patch. - Supporting this feature on filesystems other than ext4 and f2fs. (Filesystems declare support for it via their fscrypt_operations.) On UBIFS, sub-block data units don't make sense because UBIFS encrypts variable-length blocks as a result of compression. CephFS could support it, but a bit more work would be needed to make the fscrypt_*_block_inplace functions play nicely with sub-block data units. I don't think there's a use case for this on CephFS anyway. Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20230925055451.59499-6-ebiggers@kernel.org Signed-off-by: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com>
2023-07-11fscrypt: improve the "Encryption modes and usage" sectionEric Biggers1-45/+119
As the number of supported encryption modes has grown, the part of the "Encryption modes and usage" section that describes the supported encryption modes has gotten a bit messy. It presents useful information, but it's a bit lacking in high-level context. Rework the section to hopefully be much more useful. Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20230630064811.22569-2-ebiggers@kernel.org Signed-off-by: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com>
2023-01-28fscrypt: support decrypting data from large foliosEric Biggers1-2/+2
Try to make the filesystem-level decryption functions in fs/crypto/ aware of large folios. This includes making fscrypt_decrypt_bio() support the case where the bio contains large folios, and making fscrypt_decrypt_pagecache_blocks() take a folio instead of a page. There's no way to actually test this with large folios yet, but I've tested that this doesn't cause any regressions. Note that this patch just handles *decryption*, not encryption which will be a little more difficult. Signed-off-by: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com> Reviewed-by: Matthew Wilcox (Oracle) <willy@infradead.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20230127224202.355629-1-ebiggers@kernel.org
2022-12-02fscrypt: add additional documentation for SM4 supportEric Biggers1-0/+6
Add a paragraph about SM4, like there is for the other modes. Signed-off-by: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com> Reviewed-by: Tianjia Zhang <tianjia.zhang@linux.alibaba.com> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20221201191452.6557-1-ebiggers@kernel.org
2022-12-01fscrypt: Add SM4 XTS/CTS symmetric algorithm supportTianjia Zhang1-0/+1
Add support for XTS and CTS mode variant of SM4 algorithm. The former is used to encrypt file contents, while the latter (SM4-CTS-CBC) is used to encrypt filenames. SM4 is a symmetric algorithm widely used in China, and is even mandatory algorithm in some special scenarios. We need to provide these users with the ability to encrypt files or disks using SM4-XTS. Signed-off-by: Tianjia Zhang <tianjia.zhang@linux.alibaba.com> Signed-off-by: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20221201125819.36932-3-tianjia.zhang@linux.alibaba.com
2022-06-10fscrypt: Add HCTR2 support for filename encryptionNathan Huckleberry1-5/+17
HCTR2 is a tweakable, length-preserving encryption mode that is intended for use on CPUs with dedicated crypto instructions. HCTR2 has the property that a bitflip in the plaintext changes the entire ciphertext. This property fixes a known weakness with filename encryption: when two filenames in the same directory share a prefix of >= 16 bytes, with AES-CTS-CBC their encrypted filenames share a common substring, leaking information. HCTR2 does not have this problem. More information on HCTR2 can be found here: "Length-preserving encryption with HCTR2": https://eprint.iacr.org/2021/1441.pdf Signed-off-by: Nathan Huckleberry <nhuck@google.com> Reviewed-by: Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@kernel.org> Acked-by: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com> Signed-off-by: Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>
2022-05-09fs: Add read_folio documentationMatthew Wilcox (Oracle)1-1/+1
Convert all the ->readpage documentation to ->read_folio. Signed-off-by: Matthew Wilcox (Oracle) <willy@infradead.org>
2022-02-08fscrypt: update documentation for direct I/O supportEric Biggers1-2/+23
Now that direct I/O is supported on encrypted files in some cases, document what these cases are. Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20220128233940.79464-6-ebiggers@kernel.org Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de> Signed-off-by: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com>
2021-09-22fscrypt: allow 256-bit master keys with AES-256-XTSEric Biggers1-5/+5
fscrypt currently requires a 512-bit master key when AES-256-XTS is used, since AES-256-XTS keys are 512-bit and fscrypt requires that the master key be at least as long any key that will be derived from it. However, this is overly strict because AES-256-XTS doesn't actually have a 512-bit security strength, but rather 256-bit. The fact that XTS takes twice the expected key size is a quirk of the XTS mode. It is sufficient to use 256 bits of entropy for AES-256-XTS, provided that it is first properly expanded into a 512-bit key, which HKDF-SHA512 does. Therefore, relax the check of the master key size to use the security strength of the derived key rather than the size of the derived key (except for v1 encryption policies, which don't use HKDF). Besides making things more flexible for userspace, this is needed in order for the use of a KDF which only takes a 256-bit key to be introduced into the fscrypt key hierarchy. This will happen with hardware-wrapped keys support, as all known hardware which supports that feature uses an SP800-108 KDF using AES-256-CMAC, so the wrapped keys are wrapped 256-bit AES keys. Moreover, there is interest in fscrypt supporting the same type of AES-256-CMAC based KDF in software as an alternative to HKDF-SHA512. There is no security problem with such features, so fix the key length check to work properly with them. Reviewed-by: Paul Crowley <paulcrowley@google.com> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20210921030303.5598-1-ebiggers@kernel.org Signed-off-by: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com>
2021-09-20fscrypt: improve documentation for inline encryptionEric Biggers1-17/+56
Currently the fscrypt inline encryption support is documented in the "Implementation details" section, and it doesn't go into much detail. It's really more than just an "implementation detail" though, as there is a user-facing mount option. Also, hardware-wrapped key support (an upcoming feature) will depend on inline encryption and will affect the on-disk format; by definition that's not just an implementation detail. Therefore, move this documentation into its own section and expand it. Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20210916174928.65529-4-ebiggers@kernel.org Signed-off-by: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com>
2021-07-25fscrypt: align Base64 encoding with RFC 4648 base64urlEric Biggers1-5/+5
fscrypt uses a Base64 encoding to encode no-key filenames (the filenames that are presented to userspace when a directory is listed without its encryption key). There are many variants of Base64, but the most common ones are specified by RFC 4648. fscrypt can't use the regular RFC 4648 "base64" variant because "base64" uses the '/' character, which isn't allowed in filenames. However, RFC 4648 also specifies a "base64url" variant for use in URLs and filenames. "base64url" is less common than "base64", but it's still implemented in many programming libraries. Unfortunately, what fscrypt actually uses is a custom Base64 variant that differs from "base64url" in several ways: - The binary data is divided into 6-bit chunks differently. - Values 62 and 63 are encoded with '+' and ',' instead of '-' and '_'. - '='-padding isn't used. This isn't a problem per se, as the padding isn't technically necessary, and RFC 4648 doesn't strictly require it. But it needs to be properly documented. There have been two attempts to copy the fscrypt Base64 code into lib/ (https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20200821182813.52570-6-jlayton@kernel.org and https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20210716110428.9727-5-hare@suse.de), and both have been caught up by the fscrypt Base64 variant being nonstandard and not properly documented. Also, the planned use of the fscrypt Base64 code in the CephFS storage back-end will prevent it from being changed later (whereas currently it can still be changed), so we need to choose an encoding that we're happy with before it's too late. Therefore, switch the fscrypt Base64 variant to base64url, in order to align more closely with RFC 4648 and other implementations and uses of Base64. However, I opted not to implement '='-padding, as '='-padding adds complexity, is unnecessary, and isn't required by the RFC. Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20210718000125.59701-1-ebiggers@kernel.org Reviewed-by: Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.de> Signed-off-by: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com>
2021-07-25fscrypt: remove mention of symlink st_size quirk from documentationEric Biggers1-5/+0
Now that the correct st_size is reported for encrypted symlinks on all filesystems, update the documentation accordingly. Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20210702065350.209646-6-ebiggers@kernel.org Signed-off-by: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com>
2020-10-15docs: fs: fscrypt.rst: get rid of :c:type: tagsMauro Carvalho Chehab1-38/+36
The :c:type: tag has problems with Sphinx 3.x, as structs there should be declared with c:struct. So, remove them, relying at automarkup.py extension to convert them into cross-references. Signed-off-by: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab+huawei@kernel.org>
2020-07-27fscrypt: document inline encryption supportSatya Tangirala1-1/+15
Update the fscrypt documentation file for inline encryption support. Signed-off-by: Satya Tangirala <satyat@google.com> Reviewed-by: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com> Reviewed-by: Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk@kernel.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20200724184501.1651378-7-satyat@google.com Signed-off-by: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com>
2020-07-20fscrypt: rename FS_KEY_DERIVATION_NONCE_SIZEEric Biggers1-3/+3
The name "FS_KEY_DERIVATION_NONCE_SIZE" is a bit outdated since due to the addition of FSCRYPT_POLICY_FLAG_DIRECT_KEY, the file nonce may now be used as a tweak instead of for key derivation. Also, we're now prefixing the fscrypt constants with "FSCRYPT_" instead of "FS_". Therefore, rename this constant to FSCRYPT_FILE_NONCE_SIZE. Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20200708215722.147154-1-ebiggers@kernel.org Signed-off-by: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com>
2020-07-08fscrypt: add inline encryption supportSatya Tangirala1-0/+3
Add support for inline encryption to fs/crypto/. With "inline encryption", the block layer handles the decryption/encryption as part of the bio, instead of the filesystem doing the crypto itself via Linux's crypto API. This model is needed in order to take advantage of the inline encryption hardware present on most modern mobile SoCs. To use inline encryption, the filesystem needs to be mounted with '-o inlinecrypt'. Blk-crypto will then be used instead of the traditional filesystem-layer crypto whenever possible to encrypt the contents of any encrypted files in that filesystem. Fscrypt still provides the key and IV to use, and the actual ciphertext on-disk is still the same; therefore it's testable using the existing fscrypt ciphertext verification tests. Note that since blk-crypto has a fallback to Linux's crypto API, and also supports all the encryption modes currently supported by fscrypt, this feature is usable and testable even without actual inline encryption hardware. Per-filesystem changes will be needed to set encryption contexts when submitting bios and to implement the 'inlinecrypt' mount option. This patch just adds the common code. Signed-off-by: Satya Tangirala <satyat@google.com> Reviewed-by: Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk@kernel.org> Reviewed-by: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com> Reviewed-by: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20200702015607.1215430-3-satyat@google.com Co-developed-by: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com> Signed-off-by: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com>
2020-05-19fscrypt: add support for IV_INO_LBLK_32 policiesEric Biggers1-4/+29
The eMMC inline crypto standard will only specify 32 DUN bits (a.k.a. IV bits), unlike UFS's 64. IV_INO_LBLK_64 is therefore not applicable, but an encryption format which uses one key per policy and permits the moving of encrypted file contents (as f2fs's garbage collector requires) is still desirable. To support such hardware, add a new encryption format IV_INO_LBLK_32 that makes the best use of the 32 bits: the IV is set to 'SipHash-2-4(inode_number) + file_logical_block_number mod 2^32', where the SipHash key is derived from the fscrypt master key. We hash only the inode number and not also the block number, because we need to maintain contiguity of DUNs to merge bios. Unlike with IV_INO_LBLK_64, with this format IV reuse is possible; this is unavoidable given the size of the DUN. This means this format should only be used where the requirements of the first paragraph apply. However, the hash spreads out the IVs in the whole usable range, and the use of a keyed hash makes it difficult for an attacker to determine which files use which IVs. Besides the above differences, this flag works like IV_INO_LBLK_64 in that on ext4 it is only allowed if the stable_inodes feature has been enabled to prevent inode numbers and the filesystem UUID from changing. Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20200515204141.251098-1-ebiggers@kernel.org Reviewed-by: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu> Reviewed-by: Paul Crowley <paulcrowley@google.com> Signed-off-by: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com>
2020-03-19fscrypt: add FS_IOC_GET_ENCRYPTION_NONCE ioctlEric Biggers1-0/+11
Add an ioctl FS_IOC_GET_ENCRYPTION_NONCE which retrieves the nonce from an encrypted file or directory. The nonce is the 16-byte random value stored in the inode's encryption xattr. It is normally used together with the master key to derive the inode's actual encryption key. The nonces are needed by automated tests that verify the correctness of the ciphertext on-disk. Except for the IV_INO_LBLK_64 case, there's no way to replicate a file's ciphertext without knowing that file's nonce. The nonces aren't secret, and the existing ciphertext verification tests in xfstests retrieve them from disk using debugfs or dump.f2fs. But in environments that lack these debugging tools, getting the nonces by manually parsing the filesystem structure would be very hard. To make this important type of testing much easier, let's just add an ioctl that retrieves the nonce. Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20200314205052.93294-2-ebiggers@kernel.org Reviewed-by: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu> Signed-off-by: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com>
2020-01-30Merge tag 'ext4_for_linus' of ↵Linus Torvalds1-3/+3
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tytso/ext4 Pull ext4 updates from Ted Ts'o: "This merge window, we've added some performance improvements in how we handle inode locking in the read/write paths, and improving the performance of Direct I/O overwrites. We also now record the error code which caused the first and most recent ext4_error() report in the superblock, to make it easier to root cause problems in production systems. There are also many of the usual cleanups and miscellaneous bug fixes" * tag 'ext4_for_linus' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tytso/ext4: (49 commits) jbd2: clean __jbd2_journal_abort_hard() and __journal_abort_soft() jbd2: make sure ESHUTDOWN to be recorded in the journal superblock ext4, jbd2: ensure panic when aborting with zero errno jbd2: switch to use jbd2_journal_abort() when failed to submit the commit record jbd2_seq_info_next should increase position index jbd2: remove pointless assertion in __journal_remove_journal_head ext4,jbd2: fix comment and code style jbd2: delete the duplicated words in the comments ext4: fix extent_status trace points ext4: fix symbolic enum printing in trace output ext4: choose hardlimit when softlimit is larger than hardlimit in ext4_statfs_project() ext4: fix race conditions in ->d_compare() and ->d_hash() ext4: make dioread_nolock the default ext4: fix extent_status fragmentation for plain files jbd2: clear JBD2_ABORT flag before journal_reset to update log tail info when load journal ext4: drop ext4_kvmalloc() ext4: Add EXT4_IOC_FSGETXATTR/EXT4_IOC_FSSETXATTR to compat_ioctl ext4: remove unused macro MPAGE_DA_EXTENT_TAIL ext4: add missing braces in ext4_ext_drop_refs() ext4: fix some nonstandard indentation in extents.c ...
2020-01-22fscrypt: improve format of no-key namesDaniel Rosenberg1-1/+1
When an encrypted directory is listed without the key, the filesystem must show "no-key names" that uniquely identify directory entries, are at most 255 (NAME_MAX) bytes long, and don't contain '/' or '\0'. Currently, for short names the no-key name is the base64 encoding of the ciphertext filename, while for long names it's the base64 encoding of the ciphertext filename's dirhash and second-to-last 16-byte block. This format has the following problems: - Since it doesn't always include the dirhash, it's incompatible with directories that will use a secret-keyed dirhash over the plaintext filenames. In this case, the dirhash won't be computable from the ciphertext name without the key, so it instead must be retrieved from the directory entry and always included in the no-key name. Casefolded encrypted directories will use this type of dirhash. - It's ambiguous: it's possible to craft two filenames that map to the same no-key name, since the method used to abbreviate long filenames doesn't use a proper cryptographic hash function. Solve both these problems by switching to a new no-key name format that is the base64 encoding of a variable-length structure that contains the dirhash, up to 149 bytes of the ciphertext filename, and (if any bytes remain) the SHA-256 of the remaining bytes of the ciphertext filename. This ensures that each no-key name contains everything needed to find the directory entry again, contains only legal characters, doesn't exceed NAME_MAX, is unambiguous unless there's a SHA-256 collision, and that we only take the performance hit of SHA-256 on very long filenames. Note: this change does *not* address the existing issue where users can modify the 'dirhash' part of a no-key name and the filesystem may still accept the name. Signed-off-by: Daniel Rosenberg <drosen@google.com> [EB: improved comments and commit message, fixed checking return value of base64_decode(), check for SHA-256 error, continue to set disk_name for short names to keep matching simpler, and many other cleanups] Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20200120223201.241390-7-ebiggers@kernel.org Signed-off-by: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com>
2020-01-22fscrypt: clarify what is meant by a per-file keyEric Biggers1-12/+12
Now that there's sometimes a second type of per-file key (the dirhash key), clarify some function names, macros, and documentation that specifically deal with per-file *encryption* keys. Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20200120223201.241390-4-ebiggers@kernel.org Reviewed-by: Daniel Rosenberg <drosen@google.com> Signed-off-by: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com>
2020-01-22fscrypt: derive dirhash key for casefolded directoriesDaniel Rosenberg1-0/+10
When we allow indexed directories to use both encryption and casefolding, for the dirhash we can't just hash the ciphertext filenames that are stored on-disk (as is done currently) because the dirhash must be case insensitive, but the stored names are case-preserving. Nor can we hash the plaintext names with an unkeyed hash (or a hash keyed with a value stored on-disk like ext4's s_hash_seed), since that would leak information about the names that encryption is meant to protect. Instead, if we can accept a dirhash that's only computable when the fscrypt key is available, we can hash the plaintext names with a keyed hash using a secret key derived from the directory's fscrypt master key. We'll use SipHash-2-4 for this purpose. Prepare for this by deriving a SipHash key for each casefolded encrypted directory. Make sure to handle deriving the key not only when setting up the directory's fscrypt_info, but also in the case where the casefold flag is enabled after the fscrypt_info was already set up. (We could just always derive the key regardless of casefolding, but that would introduce unnecessary overhead for people not using casefolding.) Signed-off-by: Daniel Rosenberg <drosen@google.com> [EB: improved commit message, updated fscrypt.rst, squashed with change that avoids unnecessarily deriving the key, and many other cleanups] Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20200120223201.241390-3-ebiggers@kernel.org Signed-off-by: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com>
2020-01-22fscrypt: don't allow v1 policies with casefoldingDaniel Rosenberg1-1/+3
Casefolded encrypted directories will use a new dirhash method that requires a secret key. If the directory uses a v2 encryption policy, it's easy to derive this key from the master key using HKDF. However, v1 encryption policies don't provide a way to derive additional keys. Therefore, don't allow casefolding on directories that use a v1 policy. Specifically, make it so that trying to enable casefolding on a directory that has a v1 policy fails, trying to set a v1 policy on a casefolded directory fails, and trying to open a casefolded directory that has a v1 policy (if one somehow exists on-disk) fails. Signed-off-by: Daniel Rosenberg <drosen@google.com> [EB: improved commit message, updated fscrypt.rst, and other cleanups] Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20200120223201.241390-2-ebiggers@kernel.org Signed-off-by: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com>
2020-01-17ext4: allow ZERO_RANGE on encrypted filesEric Biggers1-3/+3
When ext4 encryption support was first added, ZERO_RANGE was disallowed, supposedly because test failures (e.g. ext4/001) were seen when enabling it, and at the time there wasn't enough time/interest to debug it. However, there's actually no reason why ZERO_RANGE can't work on encrypted files. And it fact it *does* work now. Whole blocks in the zeroed range are converted to unwritten extents, as usual; encryption makes no difference for that part. Partial blocks are zeroed in the pagecache and then ->writepages() encrypts those blocks as usual. ext4_block_zero_page_range() handles reading and decrypting the block if needed before actually doing the pagecache write. Also, f2fs has always supported ZERO_RANGE on encrypted files. As far as I can tell, the reason that ext4/001 was failing in v4.1 was actually because of one of the bugs fixed by commit 36086d43f657 ("ext4 crypto: fix bugs in ext4_encrypted_zeroout()"). The bug made ext4_encrypted_zeroout() always return a positive value, which caused unwritten extents in encrypted files to sometimes not be marked as initialized after being written to. This bug was not actually in ZERO_RANGE; it just happened to trigger during the extents manipulation done in ext4/001 (and probably other tests too). So, let's enable ZERO_RANGE on encrypted files on ext4. Tested with: gce-xfstests -c ext4/encrypt -g auto gce-xfstests -c ext4/encrypt_1k -g auto Got the same set of test failures both with and without this patch. But with this patch 6 fewer tests are skipped: ext4/001, generic/008, generic/009, generic/033, generic/096, and generic/511. Signed-off-by: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20191226154216.4808-1-ebiggers@kernel.org Signed-off-by: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>
2019-12-31fscrypt: support passing a keyring key to FS_IOC_ADD_ENCRYPTION_KEYEric Biggers1-3/+32
Extend the FS_IOC_ADD_ENCRYPTION_KEY ioctl to allow the raw key to be specified by a Linux keyring key, rather than specified directly. This is useful because fscrypt keys belong to a particular filesystem instance, so they are destroyed when that filesystem is unmounted. Usually this is desired. But in some cases, userspace may need to unmount and re-mount the filesystem while keeping the keys, e.g. during a system update. This requires keeping the keys somewhere else too. The keys could be kept in memory in a userspace daemon. But depending on the security architecture and assumptions, it can be preferable to keep them only in kernel memory, where they are unreadable by userspace. We also can't solve this by going back to the original fscrypt API (where for each file, the master key was looked up in the process's keyring hierarchy) because that caused lots of problems of its own. Therefore, add the ability for FS_IOC_ADD_ENCRYPTION_KEY to accept a Linux keyring key. This solves the problem by allowing userspace to (if needed) save the keys securely in a Linux keyring for re-provisioning, while still using the new fscrypt key management ioctls. This is analogous to how dm-crypt accepts a Linux keyring key, but the key is then stored internally in the dm-crypt data structures rather than being looked up again each time the dm-crypt device is accessed. Use a custom key type "fscrypt-provisioning" rather than one of the existing key types such as "logon". This is strongly desired because it enforces that these keys are only usable for a particular purpose: for fscrypt as input to a particular KDF. Otherwise, the keys could also be passed to any kernel API that accepts a "logon" key with any service prefix, e.g. dm-crypt, UBIFS, or (recently proposed) AF_ALG. This would risk leaking information about the raw key despite it ostensibly being unreadable. Of course, this mistake has already been made for multiple kernel APIs; but since this is a new API, let's do it right. This patch has been tested using an xfstest which I wrote to test it. Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20191119222447.226853-1-ebiggers@kernel.org Signed-off-by: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com>
2019-11-30Merge tag 'ext4_for_linus' of ↵Linus Torvalds1-2/+2
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tytso/ext4 Pull ext4 updates from Ted Ts'o: "This merge window saw the the following new featuers added to ext4: - Direct I/O via iomap (required the iomap-for-next branch from Darrick as a prereq). - Support for using dioread-nolock where the block size < page size. - Support for encryption for file systems where the block size < page size. - Rework of journal credits handling so a revoke-heavy workload will not cause the journal to run out of space. - Replace bit-spinlocks with spinlocks in jbd2 Also included were some bug fixes and cleanups, mostly to clean up corner cases from fuzzed file systems and error path handling" * tag 'ext4_for_linus' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tytso/ext4: (59 commits) ext4: work around deleting a file with i_nlink == 0 safely ext4: add more paranoia checking in ext4_expand_extra_isize handling jbd2: make jbd2_handle_buffer_credits() handle reserved handles ext4: fix a bug in ext4_wait_for_tail_page_commit ext4: bio_alloc with __GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM never fails ext4: code cleanup for get_next_id ext4: fix leak of quota reservations ext4: remove unused variable warning in parse_options() ext4: Enable encryption for subpage-sized blocks fs/buffer.c: support fscrypt in block_read_full_page() ext4: Add error handling for io_end_vec struct allocation jbd2: Fine tune estimate of necessary descriptor blocks jbd2: Provide trace event for handle restarts ext4: Reserve revoke credits for freed blocks jbd2: Make credit checking more