Currently, fscrypt policies and protectors are world readable, as they
are created with mode 0644.  While this can be nice for use cases where
users share these files, those use cases seem to be quite rare, and it's
not a great default security-wise since it exposes password hashes to
all users.  While fscrypt uses a very strong password hash algorithm, it
would still be best to follow the lead of /etc/shadow and keep this
information non-world-readable.

Therefore, start creating these files with mode 0600.

Of course, if users do actually want to share these files, they have the
option of simply chmod'ing them to a less restrictive mode.  An option
could also be added to make fscrypt use the old mode 0644; however, the
need for that is currently unclear.

The metadata validation checks introduced by the previous commits are
good, but to reduce the attack surface it would be much better to avoid
reading and parsing files owned by other users in the first place.

There are some possible use cases for users sharing fscrypt metadata
files, but I think that for the vast majority of users it is unneeded
and just opens up attack surface.  Thus, make fscrypt (and pam_fscrypt)
not process policies or protectors owned by other users by default.
Specifically,

   * If fscrypt or pam_fscrypt is running as a non-root user, only
     policies and protectors owned by the user or by root can be used.

   * If fscrypt is running as root, any policy or protector can be used.
     (This is to match user expectations -- starting a sudo session
     should gain rights, not remove rights.)

   * If pam_fscrypt is running as root, only policies and protectors
     owned by root can be used.  Note that this only applies when the
     root user themselves has an fscrypt login protector, which is rare.

Add an option 'allow_cross_user_metadata' to /etc/fscrypt.conf which
allows restoring the old behavior for anyone who really needs it.

World-writable directories are not appropriate for some systems, so
offer a choice of single-user-writable and world-writable modes, with
single-user-writable being the default.  Add a new documentation section
to help users decide which one to use.

Fixes https://github.com/google/fscrypt/issues/318

"Linux filesystem encryption" sounds too vague.  Write "Linux native
filesystem encryption" instead.

Update https://github.com/google/fscrypt/issues/321
Update https://github.com/google/fscrypt/issues/324

As per the feedback at https://github.com/google/fscrypt/issues/115
where users didn't understand that the recovery passphrase is important,
restore the original behavior where recovery passphrase generation
happens automatically without a prompt.  This applies to the case where
'fscrypt encrypt' is using a login protector on a non-root filesystem.

However, leave the --no-recovery option so that the recovery passphrase
can still be disabled if the user really wants to.  Also, clarify the
information provided about the recovery passphrase.

Update https://github.com/google/fscrypt/issues/115

Resolves https://github.com/google/fscrypt/issues/305

Update https://github.com/google/fscrypt/issues/115