* 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.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
iQEzBAABCAAdFiEEK2m5VNv+CHkogTfJ8vlZVpUNgaMFAl3dHxoACgkQ8vlZVpUN
gaMZswf5AbtQhTEJDXO7Pc1ull38GIGFgAv7uAth0TymLC3h1/FEYWW0crEPFsDr
1Eei55UUVOYrMMUKQ4P7wlLX0cIh3XDPMWnRFuqBoV5/ZOsH/ZSbkY//TG2Xze/v
9wXIH/RKQnzbRtXffJ1+DnvmXJk+HFm1R1gjl0nfyUXGrnlSfqJxhLSczyd6bJJq
ehi/tso5UC/4EQsAIdWp7VWsAdaHcZ7ogHqDoy8dXpM1equ408iml7VlKr8R+Nr7
5ANpCISXChSlLLYm0NYN5vhO8upF5uDxWLdCtxVPL5kFdM2m/ELjXw9h9C+78l7C
EWJGlGlxvx07Px+e+bfStEsoixpWBg==
=0eko
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Merge tag 'ext4_for_linus' of 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 strict
jbd2: Rename h_buffer_credits to h_total_credits
jbd2: Reserve space for revoke descriptor blocks
jbd2: Drop jbd2_space_needed()
jbd2: Account descriptor blocks into t_outstanding_credits
jbd2: Factor out common parts of stopping and restarting a handle
...
Now that we have the code to support encryption for subpage-sized
blocks, this commit removes the conditional check in filesystem mount
code.
The commit also changes the support statement in
Documentation/filesystems/fscrypt.rst to reflect the fact that
encryption on filesystems with blocksize less than page size now works.
[EB: Tested with 'gce-xfstests -c ext4/encrypt_1k -g auto', using the
new "encrypt_1k" config I created. All tests pass except for those that
already fail or are excluded with the encrypt or 1k configs, and 2 tests
that try to create 1023-byte symlinks which fails since encrypted
symlinks are limited to blocksize-3 bytes. Also ran the dedicated
encryption tests using 'kvm-xfstests -c ext4/1k -g encrypt'; all pass,
including the on-disk ciphertext verification tests.]
Signed-off-by: Chandan Rajendra <chandan@linux.ibm.com>
Signed-off-by: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20191023033312.361355-3-ebiggers@kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>
Inline encryption hardware compliant with the UFS v2.1 standard or with
the upcoming version of the eMMC standard has the following properties:
(1) Per I/O request, the encryption key is specified by a previously
loaded keyslot. There might be only a small number of keyslots.
(2) Per I/O request, the starting IV is specified by a 64-bit "data unit
number" (DUN). IV bits 64-127 are assumed to be 0. The hardware
automatically increments the DUN for each "data unit" of
configurable size in the request, e.g. for each filesystem block.
Property (1) makes it inefficient to use the traditional fscrypt
per-file keys. Property (2) precludes the use of the existing
DIRECT_KEY fscrypt policy flag, which needs at least 192 IV bits.
Therefore, add a new fscrypt policy flag IV_INO_LBLK_64 which causes the
encryption to modified as follows:
- The encryption keys are derived from the master key, encryption mode
number, and filesystem UUID.
- The IVs are chosen as (inode_number << 32) | file_logical_block_num.
For filenames encryption, file_logical_block_num is 0.
Since the file nonces aren't used in the key derivation, many files may
share the same encryption key. This is much more efficient on the
target hardware. Including the inode number in the IVs and mixing the
filesystem UUID into the keys ensures that data in different files is
nevertheless still encrypted differently.
Additionally, limiting the inode and block numbers to 32 bits and
placing the block number in the low bits maintains compatibility with
the 64-bit DUN convention (property (2) above).
Since this scheme assumes that inode numbers are stable (which may
preclude filesystem shrinking) and that inode and file logical block
numbers are at most 32-bit, IV_INO_LBLK_64 will only be allowed on
filesystems that meet these constraints. These are acceptable
limitations for the cases where this format would actually be used.
Note that IV_INO_LBLK_64 is an on-disk format, not an implementation.
This patch just adds support for it using the existing filesystem layer
encryption. A later patch will add support for inline encryption.
Reviewed-by: Paul Crowley <paulcrowley@google.com>
Co-developed-by: Satya Tangirala <satyat@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Satya Tangirala <satyat@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com>
Instead of open-coding the calculations for ESSIV handling, use an ESSIV
skcipher which does all of this under the hood. ESSIV was added to the
crypto API in v5.4.
This is based on a patch from Ard Biesheuvel, but reworked to apply
after all the fscrypt changes that went into v5.4.
Tested with 'kvm-xfstests -c ext4,f2fs -g encrypt', including the
ciphertext verification tests for v1 and v2 encryption policies.
Originally-from: Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>
Acked-by: Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>
Signed-off-by: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com>
When getting fscrypt policy via EXT4_IOC_GET_ENCRYPTION_POLICY, if
encryption feature is off, it's better to return EOPNOTSUPP instead of
ENODATA, so let's add ext4_has_feature_encrypt() to do the check for
that.
This makes it so that all fscrypt ioctls consistently check for the
encryption feature, and makes ext4 consistent with f2fs in this regard.
Signed-off-by: Chao Yu <yuchao0@huawei.com>
[EB - removed unneeded braces, updated the documentation, and
added more explanation to commit message]
Signed-off-by: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com>
Update the fscrypt documentation file to catch up to all the latest
changes, including the new ioctls to manage master encryption keys in
the filesystem-level keyring and the support for v2 encryption policies.
Reviewed-by: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>
Signed-off-by: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com>
Prefix all filesystem encryption UAPI constants except the ioctl numbers
with "FSCRYPT_" rather than with "FS_". This namespaces the constants
more appropriately and makes it clear that they are related specifically
to the filesystem encryption feature, and to the 'fscrypt_*' structures.
With some of the old names like "FS_POLICY_FLAGS_VALID", it was not
immediately clear that the constant had anything to do with encryption.
This is also useful because we'll be adding more encryption-related
constants, e.g. for the policy version, and we'd otherwise have to
choose whether to use unclear names like FS_POLICY_V1 or inconsistent
names like FS_ENCRYPTION_POLICY_V1.
For source compatibility with existing userspace programs, keep the old
names defined as aliases to the new names.
Finally, as long as new names are being defined anyway, I skipped
defining new names for the fscrypt mode numbers that aren't actually
used: INVALID (0), AES_256_GCM (2), AES_256_CBC (3), SPECK128_256_XTS
(7), and SPECK128_256_CTS (8).
Reviewed-by: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>
Signed-off-by: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com>
Document how to test ext4, f2fs, and ubifs encryption with xfstests.
Reviewed-by: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>
Signed-off-by: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com>
fscrypt only uses SHA-256 for AES-128-CBC-ESSIV, which isn't the default
and is only recommended on platforms that have hardware accelerated
AES-CBC but not AES-XTS. There's no link-time dependency, since SHA-256
is requested via the crypto API on first use.
To reduce bloat, we should limit FS_ENCRYPTION to selecting the default
algorithms only. SHA-256 by itself isn't that much bloat, but it's
being discussed to move ESSIV into a crypto API template, which would
incidentally bring in other things like "authenc" support, which would
all end up being built-in since FS_ENCRYPTION is now a bool.
For Adiantum encryption we already just document that users who want to
use it have to enable CONFIG_CRYPTO_ADIANTUM themselves. So, let's do
the same for AES-128-CBC-ESSIV and CONFIG_CRYPTO_SHA256.
Acked-by: Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>
Reviewed-by: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>
Signed-off-by: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com>
Currently, trying to rename or link a regular file, directory, or
symlink into an encrypted directory fails with EPERM when the source
file is unencrypted or is encrypted with a different encryption policy,
and is on the same mountpoint. It is correct for the operation to fail,
but the choice of EPERM breaks tools like 'mv' that know to copy rather
than rename if they see EXDEV, but don't know what to do with EPERM.
Our original motivation for EPERM was to encourage users to securely
handle their data. Encrypting files by "moving" them into an encrypted
directory can be insecure because the unencrypted data may remain in
free space on disk, where it can later be recovered by an attacker.
It's much better to encrypt the data from the start, or at least try to
securely delete the source data e.g. using the 'shred' program.
However, the current behavior hasn't been effective at achieving its
goal because users tend to be confused, hack around it, and complain;
see e.g. https://github.com/google/fscrypt/issues/76. And in some cases
it's actually inconsistent or unnecessary. For example, 'mv'-ing files
between differently encrypted directories doesn't work even in cases
where it can be secure, such as when in userspace the same passphrase
protects both directories. Yet, you *can* already 'mv' unencrypted
files into an encrypted directory if the source files are on a different
mountpoint, even though doing so is often insecure.
There are probably better ways to teach users to securely handle their
files. For example, the 'fscrypt' userspace tool could provide a
command that migrates unencrypted files into an encrypted directory,
acting like 'shred' on the source files and providing appropriate
warnings depending on the type of the source filesystem and disk.
Receiving errors on unimportant files might also force some users to
disable encryption, thus making the behavior counterproductive. It's
desirable to make encryption as unobtrusive as possible.
Therefore, change the error code from EPERM to EXDEV so that tools
looking for EXDEV will fall back to a copy.
This, of course, doesn't prevent users from still doing the right things
to securely manage their files. Note that this also matches the
behavior when a file is renamed between two project quota hierarchies;
so there's precedent for using EXDEV for things other than mountpoints.
xfstests generic/398 will require an update with this change.
[Rewritten from an earlier patch series by Michael Halcrow.]
Cc: Michael Halcrow <mhalcrow@google.com>
Cc: Joe Richey <joerichey@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com>
In order to have a common code base for fscrypt "post read" processing
for all filesystems which support encryption, this commit removes
filesystem specific build config option (e.g. CONFIG_EXT4_FS_ENCRYPTION)
and replaces it with a build option (i.e. CONFIG_FS_ENCRYPTION) whose
value affects all the filesystems making use of fscrypt.
Reviewed-by: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Chandan Rajendra <chandan@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Signed-off-by: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com>
Add support for the Adiantum encryption mode to fscrypt. Adiantum is a
tweakable, length-preserving encryption mode with security provably
reducible to that of XChaCha12 and AES-256, subject to a security bound.
It's also a true wide-block mode, unlike XTS. See the paper
"Adiantum: length-preserving encryption for entry-level processors"
(https://eprint.iacr.org/2018/720.pdf) for more details. Also see
commit 059c2a4d8e ("crypto: adiantum - add Adiantum support").
On sufficiently long messages, Adiantum's bottlenecks are XChaCha12 and
the NH hash function. These algorithms are fast even on processors
without dedicated crypto instructions. Adiantum makes it feasible to
enable storage encryption on low-end mobile devices that lack AES
instructions; currently such devices are unencrypted. On ARM Cortex-A7,
on 4096-byte messages Adiantum encryption is about 4 times faster than
AES-256-XTS encryption; decryption is about 5 times faster.
In fscrypt, Adiantum is suitable for encrypting both file contents and
names. With filenames, it fixes a known weakness: when two filenames in
a directory share a common prefix of >= 16 bytes, with CTS-CBC their
encrypted filenames share a common prefix too, leaking information.
Adiantum does not have this problem.
Since Adiantum also accepts long tweaks (IVs), it's also safe to use the
master key directly for Adiantum encryption rather than deriving
per-file keys, provided that the per-file nonce is included in the IVs
and the master key isn't used for any other encryption mode. This
configuration saves memory and improves performance. A new fscrypt
policy flag is added to allow users to opt-in to this configuration.
Signed-off-by: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>
These are unused, undesired, and have never actually been used by
anybody. The original authors of this code have changed their mind about
its inclusion. While originally proposed for disk encryption on low-end
devices, the idea was discarded [1] in favor of something else before
that could really get going. Therefore, this patch removes Speck.
[1] https://marc.info/?l=linux-crypto-vger&m=153359499015659
Signed-off-by: Jason A. Donenfeld <Jason@zx2c4.com>
Acked-by: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com>
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Acked-by: Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>
Signed-off-by: Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>
fscrypt currently only supports AES encryption. However, many low-end
mobile devices have older CPUs that don't have AES instructions, e.g.
the ARMv8 Cryptography Extensions. Currently, user data on such devices
is not encrypted at rest because AES is too slow, even when the NEON
bit-sliced implementation of AES is used. Unfortunately, it is
infeasible to encrypt these devices at all when AES is the only option.
Therefore, this patch updates fscrypt to support the Speck block cipher,
which was recently added to the crypto API. The C implementation of
Speck is not especially fast, but Speck can be implemented very
efficiently with general-purpose vector instructions, e.g. ARM NEON.
For example, on an ARMv7 processor, we measured the NEON-accelerated
Speck128/256-XTS at 69 MB/s for both encryption and decryption, while
AES-256-XTS with the NEON bit-sliced implementation was only 22 MB/s
encryption and 19 MB/s decryption.
There are multiple variants of Speck. This patch only adds support for
Speck128/256, which is the variant with a 128-bit block size and 256-bit
key size -- the same as AES-256. This is believed to be the most secure
variant of Speck, and it's only about 6% slower than Speck128/128.
Speck64/128 would be at least 20% faster because it has 20% rounds, and
it can be even faster on CPUs that can't efficiently do the 64-bit
operations needed for Speck128. However, Speck64's 64-bit block size is
not preferred security-wise. ARM NEON also supports the needed 64-bit
operations even on 32-bit CPUs, resulting in Speck128 being fast enough
for our targeted use cases so far.
The chosen modes of operation are XTS for contents and CTS-CBC for
filenames. These are the same modes of operation that fscrypt defaults
to for AES. Note that as with the other fscrypt modes, Speck will not
be used unless userspace chooses to use it. Nor are any of the existing
modes (which are all AES-based) being removed, of course.
We intentionally don't make CONFIG_FS_ENCRYPTION select
CONFIG_CRYPTO_SPECK, so people will have to enable Speck support
themselves if they need it. This is because we shouldn't bloat the
FS_ENCRYPTION dependencies with every new cipher, especially ones that
aren't recommended for most users. Moreover, CRYPTO_SPECK is just the
generic implementation, which won't be fast enough for many users; in
practice, they'll need to enable CRYPTO_SPECK_NEON to get acceptable
performance.
More details about our choice of Speck can be found in our patches that
added Speck to the crypto API, and the follow-on discussion threads.
We're planning a publication that explains the choice in more detail.
But briefly, we can't use ChaCha20 as we previously proposed, since it
would be insecure to use a stream cipher in this context, with potential
IV reuse during writes on f2fs and/or on wear-leveling flash storage.
We also evaluated many other lightweight and/or ARX-based block ciphers
such as Chaskey-LTS, RC5, LEA, CHAM, Threefish, RC6, NOEKEON, SPARX, and
XTEA. However, all had disadvantages vs. Speck, such as insufficient
performance with NEON, much less published cryptanalysis, or an
insufficient security level. Various design choices in Speck make it
perform better with NEON than competing ciphers while still having a
security margin similar to AES, and in the case of Speck128 also the
same available security levels. Unfortunately, Speck does have some
political baggage attached -- it's an NSA designed cipher, and was
rejected from an ISO standard (though for context, as far as I know none
of the above-mentioned alternatives are ISO standards either).
Nevertheless, we believe it is a good solution to the problem from a
technical perspective.
Certain algorithms constructed from ChaCha or the ChaCha permutation,
such as MEM (Masked Even-Mansour) or HPolyC, may also meet our
performance requirements. However, these are new constructions that
need more time to receive the cryptographic review and acceptance needed
to be confident in their security. HPolyC hasn't been published yet,
and we are concerned that MEM makes stronger assumptions about the
underlying permutation than the ChaCha stream cipher does. In contrast,
the XTS mode of operation is relatively well accepted, and Speck has
over 70 cryptanalysis papers. Of course, these ChaCha-based algorithms
can still be added later if they become ready.
The best known attack on Speck128/256 is a differential cryptanalysis
attack on 25 of 34 rounds with 2^253 time complexity and 2^125 chosen
plaintexts, i.e. only marginally faster than brute force. There is no
known attack on the full 34 rounds.
Signed-off-by: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>
Document that encryption reduces the maximum length of a symlink target
slightly.
Signed-off-by: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>
Perhaps long overdue, add a documentation file for filesystem-level
encryption, a.k.a. fscrypt or fs/crypto/, to the Documentation
directory. The new file is based loosely on the latest version of the
"EXT4 Encryption Design Document (public version)" Google Doc, but with
many improvements made, including:
- Reflect the reality that it is not specific to ext4 anymore.
- More thoroughly document the design and user-visible API/behavior.
- Replace outdated information, such as the outdated explanation of how
encrypted filenames are hashed for indexed directories and how
encrypted filenames are presented to userspace without the key.
(This was changed just before release.)
For now the focus is on the design and user-visible API/behavior, not on
how to add encryption support to a filesystem --- since the internal API
is still pretty messy and any standalone documentation for it would
become outdated as things get refactored over time.
Reviewed-by: Michael Halcrow <mhalcrow@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>
