On Tue, May 25, 2021 at 05:25:36PM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote: > Greetings, > > * Bruce Momjian (br...@momjian.us) wrote: > > On Tue, May 25, 2021 at 05:15:55PM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote: > > > > We already discussed that there are too many other ways to break system > > > > integrity that are not encrypted/integrity-checked, e.g., changes to > > > > clog. Do you disagree? > > > > > > We had agreed that this wasn't something that was strictly required in > > > the first version and I continue to agree with that. On the other hand, > > > if we decide that we ultimately need to use an independent nonce and > > > further that we can make room in the special space for it, then it's > > > trivial to also include the tag and we absolutely should (or make it > > > optional to do so) in that case. > > > > Well, if we can't really say the data has integrity, what does the > > validation bytes accomplish? And if are going to encrypt everything > > that would allow integrity, we need to encrypt almost the entire file > > system. > > I'm not following this logic. The primary data would be guaranteed to > be unchanged and there is absolutely value in that, even if the metadata > is not guaranteed to be unmolested. Security always comes with a lot of > tradeoffs. RLS doesn't prevent certain side-channel attacks but it > still is extremely useful in a great many cases.
Well, changing the clog would change how the integrity-protected data is interpreted, so I don't see much value in it. -- Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> https://momjian.us EDB https://enterprisedb.com If only the physical world exists, free will is an illusion.
