Horton

Re: [Proposal] Table-level Transparent Data Encryption (TDE) and Key Management Service (KMS)

Masahiko Sawada <masahiko.sawada@2ndquadrant.com>

View thread
From: Masahiko Sawada <masahiko.sawada@2ndquadrant.com>
To: Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>, Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com>, Joe Conway <mail@joeconway.com>, Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>, Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@2ndquadrant.com>, Haribabu Kommi <kommi.haribabu@gmail.com>, "Moon, Insung" <Moon_Insung_i3@lab.ntt.co.jp>, Ibrar Ahmed <ibrar.ahmad@gmail.com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2019-11-02T14:48:05Z
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. Revamp the WAL record format.

On Sat, 2 Nov 2019 at 21:33, Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at> wrote:

> Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Aug 6, 2019 at 10:36 AM Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote:
>
> > Seems reasonable (not that I am an encryption expert).
> >
> > > For WAL, we effectively create a 16MB bitstream, though we can create
> it
> > > in parts as needed.  (Creating it in parts is easier in CTR mode.)  The
> > > nonce is the segment number, but each 16-byte chunk uses a different
> > > counter.  Therefore, even if you are encrypting the same 8k page
> several
> > > times in the WAL, the 8k page would be different because of the LSN
> (and
> > > other changes), and the bitstream you encrypt/XOR it with would be
> > > different because the counter would be different for that offset in the
> > > WAL.
> >
> > But, if you encrypt the same WAL page several times, the LSN won't
> > change, because a WAL page doesn't have an LSN on it, and if it did,
> > it wouldn't be changing, because an LSN is just a position within the
> > WAL stream, so any given byte on any given WAL page always has the
> > same LSN, whatever it is.
> >
> > And if the counter value changed on re-encryption, I don't see how
> > we'd know what counter value to use when decrypting.  There's no way
> > for the code that is decrypting to know how many times the page got
> > rewritten as it was being filled.
> >
> > Please correct me if I'm being stupid here.
>
> In my implementation (I haven't checked whether Masahiko Sawada changed
> this
> in his patch) I avoided repeated encryption of different data using the
> same
> key+IV by omitting the unused part of the WAL page from encryption. Already
> written records can be encrypted repeatedly because they do not change.
>
>
Yeah my patch doesn't change this part. IV for WAL encryption consists of
the segment file number, page offset within segment file and the counter
for CTR cipher mode.

Regards,

--
Masahiko Sawada  http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ <http://www.2ndquadrant.com/>
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services