| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author |
|---|
|
There's no need to include the build time, author, and copyright info
in the output of "fscrypt --version". This information is:
- Overly complex (the current string is hard to parse)
- Inaccurate (there are other authors than just me)
- Unnecessary (the Apache 2 license is for Source Code)
- Makes reproducible builds impossible
The default version string is just fine.
Signed-off-by: Joe Richey <joerichey@google.com>
|
|
If trying to unlock a v2-encrypted directory fails because the kernel
lacks support for v2 policies, show a better error message. This can
happen if someone downgrades their kernel or tries to access encrypted
directories on removable storage from a computer with an older kernel.
Detecting this case is difficult since all we have to go with is EACCES
when opening the directory. Implement a heuristic where if get EACCES,
we actually have read access to the directory, and the kernel doesn't
support v2 policies, we show the improved error message.
Before:
# fscrypt unlock dir
[ERROR] fscrypt unlock: open dir: permission denied
After:
# fscrypt unlock dir
[ERROR] fscrypt unlock: open dir: permission denied
This may be caused by the directory using a v2 encryption policy and
the current kernel not supporting it. If indeed the case, then this
directory can only be used on kernel v5.4 and later. You can create
directories accessible on older kernels by changing policy_version to
1 in /etc/fscrypt.conf.
|
|
If trying to encrypt a directory using a v2 policy fails due to the
kernel lacking support for v2 policies, show a better error message.
One way this can happen is if someone runs 'fscrypt setup' with a new
kernel and then downgrades to an old kernel.
Before:
# echo -n hunter2 | fscrypt encrypt dir --source=custom_passphrase --name=foo --quiet
[ERROR] fscrypt encrypt: inappropriate ioctl for device: system error: could not add key to the keyring
After:
# echo -n hunter2 | fscrypt encrypt dir --source=custom_passphrase --name=foo --quiet
[ERROR] fscrypt encrypt: kernel is too old to support v2 encryption policies
v2 encryption policies are only supported by kernel version 5.4 and
later. Either use a newer kernel, or change policy_version to 1 in
/etc/fscrypt.conf.
|
|
v2 encryption policies are now recommended, due to various security and
usability advantages over v1 policies. Many people have been running
into the usability problems with v1, so it's desirable to get people
onto v2 without having to manually opt-in.
Therefore, when 'fscrypt setup' creates /etc/fscrypt.conf, enable
policy_version 2 automatically if the kernel supports it.
I decided to go with this solution over the policy_version "auto" I
suggested originally because this way is simpler, it can still be
changed to "auto" later if desired, and "auto" might require changing
how we parse the config file (since currently the config file is mapped
directly to a protobuf where policy_version is an 'int' and is shared
with EncryptionOptions).
Resolves https://github.com/google/fscrypt/issues/182
|
|
There's no real need to allow users to choose the key description prefix
(a.k.a. the "service"), since on ext4 and f2fs we can just use "ext4"
and "f2fs" for compatibility with all kernels both old and new, and on
other filesystems we can just use "fscrypt". So, let's do that.
Since this removes the point of the "--legacy" option to 'fscrypt setup'
and the "compatibility" field in /etc/fscrypt.conf, remove those too.
Specifically, we start ignoring the "compatibility" in existing config
files and not writing it to new ones. The corresponding protobuf field
number and name are reserved. We stop accepting the "--legacy" option
at all, although since it was default true and there was no real reason
for anyone to change it to false, probably no one will notice. If
anyone does, they should just stop specifying the option.
Note that this change only affects user keyrings and thus only affects
v1 encryption policies, which are deprecated in favor of v2 anyway.
|
|
While it's important to generate a recovery passphrase in the linked
protector case to avoid data loss if the system is reinstalled, some
people really don't want it (even though it can be safely ignored as it
almost certainly has far more entropy than the login passphrase).
As a compromise, prompt for y/n before generating it, with default y.
Also, to allow disabling the recovery passphrase during noninteractive
use, add a --no-recovery command-line option.
Update https://github.com/google/fscrypt/issues/186
|
|
Move the deferred locking and deletion of the policy on failure to the
correct places, so that it's done in all failure cases, including in the
case where adding the recovery protector fails.
Also make the recovery protector be locked and deleted on failure.
Finally, put all the code to do deferred deprovisioning of the policy in
the same place: right after it's provisioned.
|
|
When an fscrypt command fails and prints an error message, in some cases
it isn't clear that the message is actually an error, e.g.:
fscrypt encrypt: login protectors do not need a name
Make it clear by always prefixing the message with "[ERROR] ", e.g.
[ERROR] fscrypt encrypt: login protectors do not need a name
Update https://github.com/google/fscrypt/issues/186
|
|
When 'fscrypt setup' sees that /etc/fscrypt.conf doesn't exist, don't
ask for confirmation before creating it. Just do it. This is the
normal use, and there's not a good reason to ask the user to confirm it.
|
|
If a user re-installs their system (or otherwise loses the /.fscrypt
directory on the root filesystem) they also lose access to any login
passphrase-protected directories on other filesystems, unless additional
protectors were manually added. This can be unexpected, as it may be
expected that the old login passphrase would still work.
We can't really fix this by storing a login protector on every
filesystem because:
- If a user were to have N login protectors, it would take them N times
longer to log in, as every login protector would need to be unlocked.
- If a user were to change their login passphrase while any external
volumes were unmounted, login protectors would get out of sync.
- It's preferable that an external volume isn't unlockable by itself
using only a login passphrase, as login passphrases are often weak.
Instead, generate a recovery passphrase when creating a login
passphrase-protected directory on a non-root filesystem.
The recovery passphrase is added as a custom_passphrase protector, thus
giving the policy two protectors: one pam_passphrase and one
custom_passphrase. Then this passphrase is written to a file in the new
encrypted directory. Writing the passphrase to a file here is okay
since it's encrypted, but it's obviously useless by itself; it's up to
the user to store this passphrase somewhere else if they need it.
Use a recovery passphrase instead of a "recovery code" that encodes the
policy key directly because a passphrase is more user-friendly: it can
safely be made much shorter than a key, and it works just like any other
fscrypt protector. Also, it's not as critical to allow recovery when
the .fscrypt directory on the *same* filesystem is deleted.
Resolves https://github.com/google/fscrypt/issues/164
|
|
Allow root to provide the --all-users option to 'fscrypt lock' to force
an encryption key to be removed from the filesystem (i.e., force an
encrypted directory to be locked), even if other users have added it.
To implement this option, we just need to use the
FS_IOC_REMOVE_ENCRYPTION_KEY_ALL_USERS ioctl rather than
FS_IOC_REMOVE_ENCRYPTION_KEY.
In theory this option could be implemented for the user keyrings case
too, but it would be difficult and the user keyrings are being
deprecated for fscrypt, so don't bother.
|
|
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.
|
|
Don't force the user to provide a --user argument when running fscrypt
as root if they're doing something where the TargetUser isn't actually
needed, such as provisioning/deprovisioning a v1 encryption policy
to/from the filesystem keyring, or creating a non-login protector.
Also don't set up the user keyring (or check for it being set up) if it
won't actually be used.
Finally, if we'll be provisioning/deprovisioning a v1 encryption policy
to/from the filesystem keyring, make sure the command is running as
root, since the kernel requires this.
|
|
Add support for 'fscrypt lock'. This command "locks" a directory,
undoing 'fscrypt unlock'.
When the filesystem keyring is used, 'fscrypt lock' also detects when a
directory wasn't fully locked due to some files still being in-use. It
can then be run again later to try to finish locking the files.
|
|
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.
|
|
In preparation for introducing support for the new filesystem-level
keyrings, move the existing user keyring management code from
security/keyring.go and crypto/crypto.go into a new package, 'keyring'.
This package provides functions AddEncryptionKey, RemoveEncryptionKey,
and GetEncryptionKeyStatus which delegate to either the filesystem
keyring (added by a later patch) or to the user keyring. This provides
a common interface to both types of keyrings, to the extent possible.
|
|
Preserve empty lines rather than squashing them into a single space.
This allows having command descriptions that contain multiple
paragraphs. This also eliminates the need to have a special case for
ordered lists.
|
|
Refer to the target User as 'targetUser' rather than simply 'target'.
This will help avoid confusion when we add support for the filesystem
keyring, since then the Mount will also be a "target".
|
|
Saying "Your data can be protected with one of the following sources" is
ambiguous because it could be interpreted to mean that an encrypted
directory can only have one type of protector. In fact, an encrypted
directory can have multiple protectors, and they can be of any type.
Update https://github.com/google/fscrypt/issues/164
|
|
Make it clear that this refers to a type of filesystem such as "ext4",
rather than to a specific filesystem instance.
|
|
Make the global setup command also create the metadata directory at
/.fscrypt, since that's where login protectors are placed, even when the
actual encrypted directories are on a different filesystem.
Resolves https://github.com/google/fscrypt/issues/129
|
|
Show the encryption options when running 'fscrypt status' on a
directory. E.g.:
Policy: 490515286453d3f7
Options: padding:32 contents:Adiantum filenames:Adiantum
Unlocked: Yes
|
|
These were found by a combination of manual review and a custom script
that checks for common errors.
Also removed an outdated sentence from the comment for setupBefore().
|
|
Resolves https://github.com/google/fscrypt/issues/132
|
|
* Remove spelling mistakes in the repository
* Add travis script to check for typos.
* Add command to Makefile to check for typos.
* Fixes #71
|
|
Running "go vet -shadow ./..." finds all places where a variable might
be incorrectly or unnecessarily shadowed. This fixes some of them.
|
|
|
|
Our current build tags set off the linter. We will later add in more
comprehensive build tags that will be properly formatted.
|
|
|
|
|
|
We should always log the descriptor not the entire policy structure.
|
|
Now the user is persented with help when they try to access a keyring
that isn't theirs or try to use fscrypt without a user keyring linked
into the session keyring.
|
|
Chaning the --user flag to (optionally) check for a proper keyring setup
allows us to fail early in cases where we need a working keyring.
|
|
|
|
The --user flag can now be used to have the targe user (the one whose
keyring and password will be used in fscrypt) be different than the
calling user. Very usefull for things like
sudo fscrypt purge /media/joerichey/usb --user=joerichey
which will now have privileges to drop caches, but will properly clear
the keys from the user's keyring.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The key file for the raw_key source is required to contain a wrapping
key (32 bytes), not a policy key (64 bytes).
|
|
|
|
The commit changes how we get the username representation, and uses the
new pam API for checking the proposed login token.
|
|
|
|
Now that we can distinguish between lacking encryption support and
lacking fscrypt metadata, "fscrypt status" can now display this
additional information.
|
|
Almost all actions only need to to check that the fscrypt metadata
exists (this is handled by the Mount methods). Only "fscrypt encrypt"
need to be sure the filesystem also supports encryption, so this check
is added.
|
|
Protectors are only reverted if they were created, and Policies are only
depovisioned on failure.
|
|
This commit changes all the internal import paths from `fscrypt/foo` to
`github.com/google/fscrypt/foo` so that it can be built once we release
externaly. The documentation in README.md is updated accordingly.
Also, the README has a note noting that we do not make any guarantees
about project stability before 1.0 (when it ships with Ubuntu).
Change-Id: I6ba86e442c74057c8a06ba32a42e17f94833e280
|
|
This commit adds in the "fscrypt metadata add-protector-to-policy" and
the "fscrypt metadata remove-protector-from-policy" subcommands. These
commands allow for the creating of policies protected by multiple
protectors.
Change-Id: Id7e6c057448d15757c838a82d487a1b9806f585d
|
|
This command adds in the "fscrypt metadata" command. This command allows
advanced users to manipulate the metadata directly instead of just
creating a policy or protector as an option when encrypting a directory.
As some of these methods will require certain flags, error handling for
this case is also added. As the change passphrase method must indicate
when a old vs new password is necessary, additional KeyFuncs are added
which add this indicator.
Change-Id: Ibc92872088fae078df3c0eebd4f0cfcb7252d781
|
