From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1754646AbbJ0Xfi (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Tue, 27 Oct 2015 19:35:38 -0400
Received: from mail.eperm.de ([89.247.134.16]:34409 "EHLO mail.eperm.de"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1753510AbbJ0Xff convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Tue, 27 Oct 2015 19:35:35 -0400
From: Stephan Mueller <smueller@chronox.de>
To: David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org>
Cc: Marcel Holtmann <marcel@holtmann.org>,
        Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>, linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, linux-api@vger.kernel.org,
        David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/5] crypto: add algif_akcipher user space API
Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2015 00:35:30 +0100
Message-ID: <1499937.MpmApGzYrd@tauon.atsec.com>
User-Agent: KMail/4.14.9 (Linux/4.1.8-200.fc22.x86_64; KDE/4.14.11; x86_64; ; )
In-Reply-To: <1445987716.3405.127.camel@infradead.org>
References: <1831785.BBs8Hj3CxY@myon.chronox.de> <9859277.cZClo5B21s@tauon.atsec.com> <1445987716.3405.127.camel@infradead.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

Am Mittwoch, 28. Oktober 2015, 08:15:16 schrieb David Woodhouse:

Hi David,
>
>Absolutely. The interface needs to support *both*.
>
>I've spent a lot of time chasing through userspace stacks, fixing
>broken assumptions that we will *always* have the actual key material
>in a file — and making libraries and applications accept PKCS#11 URIs
>referring to keys in hardware as well as filenames.
>
>I am violently opposed to exposing an API from the kernel which makes
>that *same* fundamental mistake, and ties its users to using *only*
>software keys.
>
>FROM THE BEGINNING, users of this new API should be able to cope with
>the fact that they might not *have* the key material, and that they
>might simply be referring to a key which exists elsewhere. Such as in
>the TPM, or within an SGX software enclave.

Albeit that all sounds like the crown jewel, how do you propose that shall 
happen?

Assume that you have a web server that has a pub and priv key in its current 
configuration -- I guess that is the vast majority of configs.

Can you please elaborate how the process for such a web server shall really 
work?


Ciao
Stephan