Message ID | 4616980.31r3eYUQgx@positron.chronox.de |
---|---|
Headers | show |
Series | Add KDF implementations to crypto API | expand |
Am Montag, dem 04.01.2021 um 14:20 -0800 schrieb Eric Biggers: > On Mon, Jan 04, 2021 at 10:45:57PM +0100, Stephan Müller wrote: > > The HKDF addition is used to replace the implementation in the filesystem > > crypto extension. This code was tested by using an EXT4 encrypted file > > system that was created and contains files written to by the current > > implementation. Using the new implementation a successful read of the > > existing files was possible and new files / directories were created > > and read successfully. These newly added file system objects could be > > successfully read using the current code. Yet if there is a test suite > > to validate whether the invokcation of the HKDF calculates the same > > result as the existing implementation, I would be happy to validate > > the implementation accordingly. > > See https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/filesystems/fscrypt.html#tests > for how to run the fscrypt tests. 'kvm-xfstests -c ext4 generic/582' should > be > enough for this, though you could run all the tests if you want. I ran the $(kvm-xfstests -c encrypt -g auto) on 5.11-rc2 with and without my HKDF changes. I.e. the testing shows the same results for both kernels which seems to imply that my HKDF changes do not change the behavior. I get the following errors in both occasions - let me know if I should dig a bit more. [failed, exit status 1] [06:19:21]- output mismatch (see /results/ext4/results-encrypt/ext4/023.out.bad) --- tests/ext4/023.out 2020-03-20 02:31:32.000000000 +0000 +++ /results/ext4/results-encrypt/ext4/023.out.bad 2021-01-07 06:19:21.292339438 +0000 @@ -1,3 +1,2 @@ QA output created by 023 Format and populate -Mount ... (Run 'diff -u /root/xfstests/tests/ext4/023.out /results/ext4/results- encrypt/ext4/023.out.bad' to see the entire ) [failed, exit status 1] [06:19:28]- output mismatch (see /results/ext4/results-encrypt/ext4/028.out.bad) --- tests/ext4/028.out 2020-03-20 02:31:32.000000000 +0000 +++ /results/ext4/results-encrypt/ext4/028.out.bad 2021-01-07 06:19:28.762339424 +0000 @@ -1,3 +1,2 @@ QA output created by 028 Format and mount -Compare fsmap ... (Run 'diff -u /root/xfstests/tests/ext4/028.out /results/ext4/results- encrypt/ext4/028.out.bad' to see the entire ) [failed, exit status 1] [06:21:02]- output mismatch (see /results/ext4/results-encrypt/ext4/044.out.bad) --- tests/ext4/044.out 2020-03-20 02:31:32.000000000 +0000 +++ /results/ext4/results-encrypt/ext4/044.out.bad 2021-01-07 06:21:02.215672727 +0000 @@ -1,2 +1,5 @@ QA output created by 044 Silence is golden +mount: /vdc: wrong fs type, bad option, bad superblock on /dev/vdc, missing codepage or helper program, or other e. +ext3 mount failed +(see /results/ext4/results-encrypt/ext4/044.full for details) ... (Run 'diff -u /root/xfstests/tests/ext4/044.out /results/ext4/results- encrypt/ext4/044.out.bad' to see the entire ) generic/085 [06:32:40][ 849.654788] run fstests generic/085 at 2021-01-07 06:32:40 [ 849.903286] EXT4-fs (vdd): Test dummy encryption mode enabled [ 849.915355] EXT4-fs (vdd): mounted filesystem with ordered data mode. Opts: acl,user_xattr,block_validity,test_dummy. [ 850.267282] dm-0: detected capacity change from 524288 to 0 [ 850.369101] EXT4-fs (dm-0): mounted filesystem with ordered data mode. Opts: (null). Quota mode: none. [ 850.370106] ext4 filesystem being mounted at /vdc supports timestamps until 2038 (0x7fffffff) [ 850.479981] EXT4-fs (dm-0): mounted filesystem with ordered data mode. Opts: (null). Quota mode: none. [ 850.480782] ext4 filesystem being mounted at /vdc supports timestamps until 2038 (0x7fffffff) [ 850.530734] BUG: kernel NULL pointer dereference, address: 0000000000000058 [ 850.531241] #PF: supervisor read access in kernel mode [ 850.531613] #PF: error_code(0x0000) - not-present page [ 850.532020] PGD 2a496067 P4D 2a496067 PUD 0 [ 850.532336] Oops: 0000 [#1] SMP NOPTI [ 850.532604] CPU: 1 PID: 19542 Comm: dmsetup Not tainted 5.11.0-rc2-xfstests #8 [ 850.533156] Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996), BIOS 1.14.0-1.fc33 04/01/2014 [ 850.533780] RIP: 0010:thaw_bdev+0x47/0x90 [ 850.534106] Code: 8b 83 d8 04 00 00 85 c0 74 57 83 e8 01 45 31 e4 85 c0 89 83 d8 04 00 00 7f 2d 48 8b bb 80 05 00 007 [ 850.535447] RSP: 0018:ffffb97586c2bcd8 EFLAGS: 00010286 [ 850.535822] RAX: 0000000000000000 RBX: ffff9df4a2e74240 RCX: ffffb97586c2bbdc [ 850.536361] RDX: ffff9df4fdc17e80 RSI: ffff9df4a2e74790 RDI: ffff9df48b0bf000 [ 850.536864] RBP: ffff9df4a2e74720 R08: 0000000000000000 R09: 0000000000040216 [ 850.537410] R10: 0000000000000000 R11: 0000000000000000 R12: 0000000000000000 [ 850.537950] R13: 0000000000000000 R14: 0000000000000006 R15: 0000000000000001 [ 850.538455] FS: 0000000000000000(0000) GS:ffff9df4fdc00000(0063) knlGS:00000000f7a487c0 [ 850.539063] CS: 0010 DS: 002b ES: 002b CR0: 0000000080050033 [ 850.539474] CR2: 0000000000000058 CR3: 00000000072ec002 CR4: 0000000000770ee0 [ 850.540017] PKRU: 55555554 [ 850.540215] Call Trace: [ 850.540395] __dm_resume+0x70/0x90 [ 850.540649] dm_resume+0x10d/0x120 [ 850.540934] do_resume+0x17b/0x210 [ 850.541182] ctl_ioctl+0x163/0x260 [ 850.541428] ? dev_set_geometry+0x180/0x180 [ 850.541730] dm_compat_ctl_ioctl+0xc/0x10 [ 850.542056] __do_compat_sys_ioctl+0x137/0x160 [ 850.542375] __do_fast_syscall_32+0x5c/0x90 [ 850.542682] do_fast_syscall_32+0x2f/0x70 [ 850.543007] entry_SYSENTER_compat_after_hwframe+0x4d/0x5f [ 850.543404] RIP: 0023:0xf7f05549 [ 850.543640] Code: b8 01 10 06 03 74 b4 01 10 07 03 74 b0 01 10 08 03 74 d8 01 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 000 [ 850.545029] RSP: 002b:00000000ffaed778 EFLAGS: 00000296 ORIG_RAX: 0000000000000036 [ 850.545566] RAX: ffffffffffffffda RBX: 0000000000000003 RCX: 00000000c138fd06 [ 850.546107] RDX: 00000000573ca4f0 RSI: 00000000f7eea266 RDI: 00000000f7eea266 [ 850.546613] RBP: 00000000ffaed828 R08: 0000000000000000 R09: 0000000000000000 [ 850.547154] R10: 0000000000000000 R11: 0000000000000000 R12: 0000000000000000 [ 850.547651] R13: 0000000000000000 R14: 0000000000000000 R15: 0000000000000000 [ 850.548191] CR2: 0000000000000058 [ 850.548431] ---[ end trace ec81eda86d2573e7 ]--- [ 850.548761] RIP: 0010:thaw_bdev+0x47/0x90 [ 850.549089] Code: 8b 83 d8 04 00 00 85 c0 74 57 83 e8 01 45 31 e4 85 c0 89 83 d8 04 00 00 7f 2d 48 8b bb 80 05 00 007 [ 850.550444] RSP: 0018:ffffb97586c2bcd8 EFLAGS: 00010286 [ 850.550816] RAX: 0000000000000000 RBX: ffff9df4a2e74240 RCX: ffffb97586c2bbdc [ 850.551359] RDX: ffff9df4fdc17e80 RSI: ffff9df4a2e74790 RDI: ffff9df48b0bf000 [ 850.551863] RBP: ffff9df4a2e74720 R08: 0000000000000000 R09: 0000000000040216 [ 850.552405] R10: 0000000000000000 R11: 0000000000000000 R12: 0000000000000000 [ 850.552944] R13: 0000000000000000 R14: 0000000000000006 R15: 0000000000000001 [ 850.553450] FS: 0000000000000000(0000) GS:ffff9df4fdc00000(0063) knlGS:00000000f7a487c0 [ 850.554060] CS: 0010 DS: 002b ES: 002b CR0: 0000000080050033 [ 850.554466] CR2: 0000000000000058 CR3: 00000000072ec002 CR4: 0000000000770ee0 [ 850.555008] PKRU: 55555554 [ 850.555206] BUG: sleeping function called from invalid context at include/linux/percpu-rwsem.h:49 [ 850.555833] in_atomic(): 0, irqs_disabled(): 1, non_block: 0, pid: 19542, name: dmsetup [ 850.556436] INFO: lockdep is turned off. [ 850.556718] irq event stamp: 8602 [ 850.556997] hardirqs last enabled at (8601): [<ffffffff95cd4ed6>] queue_work_on+0x56/0x70 [ 850.557588] hardirqs last disabled at (8602): [<ffffffff969453c5>] exc_page_fault+0x35/0x240 [ 850.558220] softirqs last enabled at (8568): [<ffffffff964a651a>] __rhashtable_insert_fast.constprop.0+0x2ca/0x540 [ 850.558997] softirqs last disabled at (8566): [<ffffffff964a6317>] __rhashtable_insert_fast.constprop.0+0xc7/0x540 [ 850.559729] CPU: 1 PID: 19542 Comm: dmsetup Tainted: G D 5.11.0-rc2-xfstests #8 [ 850.560373] Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996), BIOS 1.14.0-1.fc33 04/01/2014 [ 850.561030] Call Trace: [ 850.561211] dump_stack+0x77/0x97 [ 850.561454] ___might_sleep.cold+0xa6/0xb6 [ 850.561753] exit_signals+0x1c/0x2c0 [ 850.562048] do_exit+0xb4/0x3d0 [ 850.562278] rewind_stack_do_exit+0x17/0x20 [ 850.562578] RIP: 0023:0xf7f05549 [ 850.562818] Code: b8 01 10 06 03 74 b4 01 10 07 03 74 b0 01 10 08 03 74 d8 01 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 000 [ 850.564185] RSP: 002b:00000000ffaed778 EFLAGS: 00000296 ORIG_RAX: 0000000000000036 [ 850.564716] RAX: ffffffffffffffda RBX: 0000000000000003 RCX: 00000000c138fd06 [ 850.565248] RDX: 00000000573ca4f0 RSI: 00000000f7eea266 RDI: 00000000f7eea266 [ 850.565747] RBP: 00000000ffaed828 R08: 0000000000000000 R09: 0000000000000000 [ 850.566280] R10: 0000000000000000 R11: 0000000000000000 R12: 0000000000000000 [ 850.566779] R13: 0000000000000000 R14: 0000000000000000 R15: 0000000000000000 Ciao Stephan > > - Eric
On Thu, Jan 07, 2021 at 07:37:05AM +0100, Stephan Mueller wrote: > Am Montag, dem 04.01.2021 um 14:20 -0800 schrieb Eric Biggers: > > On Mon, Jan 04, 2021 at 10:45:57PM +0100, Stephan Müller wrote: > > > The HKDF addition is used to replace the implementation in the filesystem > > > crypto extension. This code was tested by using an EXT4 encrypted file > > > system that was created and contains files written to by the current > > > implementation. Using the new implementation a successful read of the > > > existing files was possible and new files / directories were created > > > and read successfully. These newly added file system objects could be > > > successfully read using the current code. Yet if there is a test suite > > > to validate whether the invokcation of the HKDF calculates the same > > > result as the existing implementation, I would be happy to validate > > > the implementation accordingly. > > > > See https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/filesystems/fscrypt.html#tests > > for how to run the fscrypt tests. 'kvm-xfstests -c ext4 generic/582' should > > be > > enough for this, though you could run all the tests if you want. > > I ran the $(kvm-xfstests -c encrypt -g auto) on 5.11-rc2 with and without my > HKDF changes. I.e. the testing shows the same results for both kernels which > seems to imply that my HKDF changes do not change the behavior. > > I get the following errors in both occasions - let me know if I should dig a > bit more. The command you ran runs almost all xfstests with the test_dummy_encryption mount option enabled, which is different from running the encryption tests -- and in fact it skips the real encryption tests, so it doesn't test the correctness of HKDF at all. It looks like you saw some unrelated test failures. Sorry if I wasn't clear -- by "all tests" I meant all encryption tests, i.e. 'kvm-xfstests -c ext4 -g encrypt'. Also, even the single test generic/582 should be sufficient to test HKDF, as I mentioned. - Eric
On Wed, Jan 06, 2021 at 10:59:24PM -0800, Eric Biggers wrote: > On Thu, Jan 07, 2021 at 07:37:05AM +0100, Stephan Mueller wrote: > > Am Montag, dem 04.01.2021 um 14:20 -0800 schrieb Eric Biggers: > > > On Mon, Jan 04, 2021 at 10:45:57PM +0100, Stephan Müller wrote: > > > > The HKDF addition is used to replace the implementation in the filesystem > > > > crypto extension. This code was tested by using an EXT4 encrypted file > > > > system that was created and contains files written to by the current > > > > implementation. Using the new implementation a successful read of the > > > > existing files was possible and new files / directories were created > > > > and read successfully. These newly added file system objects could be > > > > successfully read using the current code. Yet if there is a test suite > > > > to validate whether the invokcation of the HKDF calculates the same > > > > result as the existing implementation, I would be happy to validate > > > > the implementation accordingly. > > > > > > See https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/filesystems/fscrypt.html#tests > > > for how to run the fscrypt tests. 'kvm-xfstests -c ext4 generic/582' should > > > be > > > enough for this, though you could run all the tests if you want. > > > > I ran the $(kvm-xfstests -c encrypt -g auto) on 5.11-rc2 with and without my > > HKDF changes. I.e. the testing shows the same results for both kernels which > > seems to imply that my HKDF changes do not change the behavior. > > > > I get the following errors in both occasions - let me know if I should dig a > > bit more. > > The command you ran runs almost all xfstests with the test_dummy_encryption > mount option enabled, which is different from running the encryption tests -- > and in fact it skips the real encryption tests, so it doesn't test the > correctness of HKDF at all. It looks like you saw some unrelated test failures. > Sorry if I wasn't clear -- by "all tests" I meant all encryption tests, i.e. > 'kvm-xfstests -c ext4 -g encrypt'. Also, even the single test generic/582 > should be sufficient to test HKDF, as I mentioned. > I just did it myself and the tests pass. - Eric