Horton

Re: storing an explicit nonce

Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at>

View thread
From: Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at>
To: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>
Cc: Ants Aasma <ants@cybertec.at>, Sasasu <i@sasa.su>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Date: 2021-10-07T08:27:15Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Commits

Same data as JSON: GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources. API reference →

  1. Rethink method for assigning OIDs to the template0 and postgres DBs.

  2. pg_upgrade: Preserve database OIDs.

  3. pg_upgrade: Preserve relfilenodes and tablespace OIDs.

  4. Fix for new Boolean node

  5. Improve error handling of HMAC computations

  6. Add macro RelationIsPermanent() to report relation permanence

  7. Enhance nbtree index tuple deletion.

Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote:

> On Tue, Oct  5, 2021 at 04:29:25PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 28, 2021 at 12:30:02PM +0300, Ants Aasma wrote:
> > > On Mon, 27 Sept 2021 at 23:34, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote:
> > > We are still working on our TDE patch. Right now the focus is on refactoring
> > > temporary file access to make the TDE patch itself smaller. Reconsidering
> > > encryption mode choices given concerns expressed is next. Currently a viable
> > > option seems to be AES-XTS with LSN added into the IV. XTS doesn't have an
> > > issue with predictable IV and isn't totally broken in case of IV reuse.
> > 
> > Uh, yes, AES-XTS has benefits, but since it is a block cipher, previous
> > 16-byte blocks affect later blocks, meaning that hint bit changes would
> > also affect later blocks.  I think this means we would need to write WAL
> > full page images for hint bit changes to avoid torn pages.  Right now
> > hint bit (single bit) changes can be lost without causing torn pages. 
> > This was another of the advantages of using a stream cipher like CTR.
> 
> The above text isn't very clear.  What I am saying is that currently
> torn pages can be tolerated by hint bit writes because only a single
> byte is changing.  If we use a block cipher like AES-XTS, later 16-byte
> encrypted blocks would be changed by hint bit changes, meaning torn
> pages could not be tolerated.  This means we would have to use full page
> writes for hint bit changes, perhaps making this feature have
> unacceptable performance overhead.

IIRC, in the XTS scheme, a change of a single byte in the 16-byte block causes
the whole encrypted block to be different after the next encryption, however
the following blocks are not affected. CBC (cipher-block chaining) is the mode
where the change in one block does affect the encryption of the following
block.

I'm not sure if this fact is important from the hint bit perspective
though. It would be an important difference if there was a guarantee that the
16-byte blocks are consitent even on torn page - does e.g. proper alignment of
pages guarantee that? Nevertheless, the absence of the chaining may be a
reason to prefer CBC to XTS anyway.

-- 
Antonin Houska
Web: https://www.cybertec-postgresql.com