From: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
To: Petr Pavlu <petr.pavlu@suse.com>
Cc: dhowells@redhat.com, jarkko@kernel.org, keyrings@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] keys: Fix linking a duplicate key to a keyring's assoc_array
Date: Thu, 08 Jun 2023 15:12:54 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <2413881.1686233574@warthog.procyon.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230323130412.32097-1-petr.pavlu@suse.com>
Apologies for missing this patch.
Petr Pavlu <petr.pavlu@suse.com> wrote:
> * Back on the first task, function construct_alloc_key() first runs
> __key_link_begin() to determine an assoc_array_edit operation to
> insert a new key. Index keys in the array are compared exactly as-is,
> using keyring_compare_object(). The operation finds that "abcdef" is
> not yet present in the destination keyring.
Good catch, but I think it's probably the wrong solution.
keyring_compare_object() needs to use the ->cmp() function from the key type.
It's not just request_key() that might have a problem, but also key_link().
There are also asymmetric keys which match against multiple criteria - though
I'm fine with just matching the main description there (the important bit
being to maintain the integrity of the tree inside assoc_array).
I wonder, should I scrap the assoc_array approach and go to each keyring being
a linked-list? It's slower, but a lot easier to manage - and more forgiving
of problems.
struct key_ptr {
struct list_head link;
struct key *key;
unsigned long key_hash;
};
I'm also wondering if I should remove the key type from the matching criteria
- i.e. there can only be one key with any particular description in a ring at
once, regardless of type. Unfortunately, this is may be a UAPI breaker
somewhere.
Any thoughts?
David
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-06-08 14:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-03-23 13:04 Petr Pavlu
2023-03-30 0:13 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2023-06-08 9:55 ` Petr Pavlu
2023-06-08 13:18 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2023-06-08 13:28 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2023-04-21 2:39 ` joeyli
2023-06-08 14:12 ` David Howells [this message]
2023-06-08 19:03 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2023-06-09 9:49 ` Petr Pavlu
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=2413881.1686233574@warthog.procyon.org.uk \
--to=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=jarkko@kernel.org \
--cc=keyrings@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=petr.pavlu@suse.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®