A previous commit extended file ownership validation to policy and
protector files (by default -- there's an opt-out in /etc/fscrypt.conf).

However, that didn't apply to the parent directories:

	MOUNTPOINT
	MOUNTPOINT/.fscrypt
	MOUNTPOINT/.fscrypt/policies
	MOUNTPOINT/.fscrypt/protectors

The problem is that if the parent directories aren't trusted (owned by
another non-root user), then untrusted changes to their contents can be
made at any time, including the introduction of symlinks and so on.

While it's debatable how much of a problem this really is, given the
other validations that are done, it seems to be appropriate to validate
the parent directories too.

Therefore, this commit applies the same ownership validations to the
above four directories as are done on the metadata files themselves.

In addition, it is validated that none of these directories are symlinks
except for ".fscrypt" where this is explicitly supported.

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.

Following the example of /proc/self/mountinfo, replace the space,
newline, tab, and backslash characters with octal escape sequences so
that the output can be parsed unambiguously.

When 'fscrypt status DIR' detects that a v1-encrypted directory is still
usable but its key seems to be absent, it shows the status as
"Unlocked: Partially (incompletely locked)".  But actually it can also
be the case that the directory is unlocked by another user.  Adjust the
status message accordingly.

This commit also fixes cli-tests/t_v1_policy.

Introduce filesystem.ErrEncryptionNotEnabled and
filesystem.ErrEncryptionNotSupported which include the Mount as context,
and translate the corresponding metadata/ errors into them.  Then make
these errors show much better suggestions.

Also replace lots of other filesystem/ errors with either custom types
or with unnamed one-off errors that include more context.  Fix backwards
wrapping in lots of cases.

Finally, don't include the mountpoint in places where it's not useful,
like OS-level errors that already include the path.

'fscrypt lock' on a v1-encrypted directory doesn't warn about in-use
files, as the kernel doesn't provide a way to easily detect it.

Instead, implement a heuristic where we check whether a subdirectory can
be created.  If yes, then the directory must not be fully locked.

Make both 'fscrypt lock' and 'fscrypt status' use this heuristic.

Resolves https://github.com/google/fscrypt/issues/215

Implement adding/removing v2 encryption policy keys to/from the kernel.
The kernel requires that the new ioctls FS_IOC_ADD_ENCRYPTION_KEY and
FS_IOC_REMOVE_ENCRYPTION_KEY be used for this.  Root is not required.

However, non-root support brings an extra complication: the kernel keeps
track of which users have called FS_IOC_ADD_ENCRYPTION_KEY for the same
key.  FS_IOC_REMOVE_ENCRYPTION_KEY only works as one of these users, and
it only removes the calling user's claim to the key; the key is only
truly removed when the last claim is removed.

Implement the following behavior:

- 'fscrypt unlock' and pam_fscrypt add the key for the user, even if
  other user(s) have it added already.  This behavior is needed so that
  another user can't remove the key out from under the user.

- 'fscrypt lock' and pam_fscrypt remove the key for the user.  However,
  if the key wasn't truly removed because other users still have it
  added, 'fscrypt lock' prints a warning.

- 'fscrypt status' shows whether the directory is unlocked for anyone.

Linux v5.4 and later allows fscrypt keys to be added/removed directly
to/from the filesystem via the new ioctls FS_IOC_ADD_ENCRYPTION_KEY and
FS_IOC_REMOVE_ENCRYPTION_KEY.  Among other benefits, these fix the key
visibility problems that many users have been running into, where system
services and containers can't access encrypted files.

Allow the user to opt-in to using these new ioctls for their existing
encrypted directories by setting in their /etc/fscrypt.conf:

	"use_fs_keyring_for_v1_policies": true

Note that it can't really be on by default, since for v1 policies the
ioctls require root, whereas user keyrings don't.  I.e., setting this to
true means that users will need to use 'sudo fscrypt unlock', not
'fscrypt unlock'.  v2 policies won't have this restriction.

Make it clear that this refers to a type of filesystem such as "ext4",
rather than to a specific filesystem instance.