Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [RFC PATCH v2 0/3] ceph: add support for snapshot names encryption | From | Xiubo Li <> | Date | Thu, 17 Mar 2022 19:22:47 +0800 |
| |
On 3/17/22 6:14 PM, Luís Henriques wrote: > Xiubo Li <xiubli@redhat.com> writes: > >> Hi Luis, >> >> There has another issue you need to handle at the same time. >> >> Currently only the empty directory could be enabled the file encryption, such as >> for the following command: >> >> $ fscrypt encrypt mydir/ >> >> But should we also make sure that the mydir/.snap/ is empty ? >> >> Here the 'empty' is not totally empty, which allows it should allow long snap >> names exist. >> >> Make sense ? > Right, actually I had came across that question in the past but completely > forgot about it. > > Right now we simply check the dir stats to ensure a directory is empty. > We could add an extra check in ceph_crypt_empty_dir() to ensure that there > are no snapshots _above_ that directory (i.e. that there are no > "mydir/.snap/_name_xxxxx").
Check this only in ceph_crypt_empty_dir() seems not enough, at least not graceful.
Please see https://github.com/google/fscrypt/blob/master/cmd/fscrypt/commands.go#L305.
The google/fscrypt will read that directory to check where it's empty or not. So eventually we may need to fix it there. But for a workaround you may could fix it in ceph_crypt_empty_dir() and ceph_ioctl() when setting the key or policy ?
-- Xiubo
> > Unfortunately, I don't know enough of snapshots implementation details to > understand if it's a problem to consider a directory as being empty (in > the fscrypt context) when there are these '_name_xxx' directories. My > feeling is that this is not a problem but I really don't know. > > Do you (or anyone) have any ideas/suggestions? > > Cheers,
| |