RE: [PATCH 0/2] Add Opal unlock support to NVMe.

[Elliott, Robert (Persistent Memory)]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: linux-block-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:linux-block-
> owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Christoph Hellwig
> Sent: Monday, April 25, 2016 3:24 AM
> To: Rafael Antognolli <rafael.antognolli@xxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: linux-nvme@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
> linux-block@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] Add Opal unlock support to NVMe.
> 
> On Fri, Apr 22, 2016 at 04:12:10PM -0700, Rafael Antognolli wrote:
> > This patch series implement a small set of the Opal protocol for
> > self encrypting devices. It's implemented only what is needed for
> > saving a password and unlocking a given "locking range". The
> > password is saved on the driver and replayed back to the device
> > on resume from suspend to RAM. It is specifically supporting
> > the single user mode.

Passwords stored in memory are subject to cold boot attacks.

Could you tie this into the keyring infrastructure, so it would
least be no worse than other kernel modules?  This would allow
support for TPM-based keys (if present) to resist more attacks.
If register-based key storage or other techniques prove viable,
they would probably show up there first.

> > It is not planned to implement the full Opal protocol (at least
> > not for now).
> 
> I think the OPAL code should be a generic library outside the NVMe
> code so that we can use it for SATA and SAS as well, just with a
> little glue code for the Security Send / Receive commands to wire
> it up to NVMe.

NVDIMMs would benefit from that as well.