Re: storing an explicit nonce - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Shruthi Gowda
Subject Re: storing an explicit nonce
Date
Msg-id CAASxf_NthmRLjzwyciUekCi4SLzYf=BrwbiJtepeKJYYzbGmxQ@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: storing an explicit nonce  (Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>)
Responses preserving db/ts/relfilenode OIDs across pg_upgrade (was Re: storing an explicit nonce)
List pgsql-hackers
On Fri, May 28, 2021 at 2:39 AM Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net> wrote:
>
> Greetings,
>
> * Bruce Momjian (bruce@momjian.us) wrote:
> > On Thu, May 27, 2021 at 04:09:13PM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > > The above article, at least, suggested encrypting the sector number
> > > using the second key and then multiplying that times 2^(block number),
> > > where those blocks were actually AES 128bit blocks.  The article further
> > > claims that this is what's used in things like Bitlocker, TrueCrypt,
> > > VeraCrypt and OpenSSL.
> > >
> > > While the documentation isn't super clear, I'm taking that to mean that
> > > when you actually use EVP_aes_128_xts() in OpenSSL, and you provide it
> > > with a 256-bit key (twice the size of the AES key length function), and
> > > you give it a 'tweak', that what you would actually be passing in would
> > > be the "sector number" in the above method, or for us perhaps it would
> > > be relfilenode+block number, or maybe just block number but it seems
> > > like it'd be better to include the relfilenode to me.
> >
> > If you go in that direction, you should make sure pg_upgrade preserves
> > what you use (it does not preserve relfilenode, just pg_class.oid), and
> > CREATE DATABASE still works with a simple file copy.
>
> Ah, yes, good point, if we support in-place pg_upgrade of an encrypted
> cluster then the tweak has to be consistent between the old and new.
>
> I tend to agree with Andres that it'd be reasonable to make CREATE
> DATABASE do a bit more work for an encrypted cluster though, so I'm less
> concerned about that.
>
> Using pg_class.oid instead of relfilenode seems likely to complicate
> things like crash recovery though, wouldn't it?  I wonder if there's
> something else we could use.
>
Hi,
I have extracted the preserving relfilenode and dboid from [1] and
rebased on the current head. While tested I have found a few issues.

- Variable' dbDumpId' was not initialized before passing to
ArchiveEntry() in dumpDatabase() function due to which pg_upgrade was
failing with 'bad dumpId' error
- 'create_storage' flag was set as TRUE irrespective of relkind which
resulted in hitting assert when the source cluster had TYPE in it.
- In createdb() flow, ''dboid' was set to the preserved dboid in wrong
place. It was eventually overwritten and caused problems while
restoring the DB
- Removed the restriction on dumping the postgres DB OID

I have fixed all the issues and now the patch is working as expected.

[1] https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/7082.1562337694@localhost


Regards,
Shruthi KC
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com

Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Michael Paquier
Date:
Subject: Re: Changes to recovery_min_apply_delay are ignored while waiting for delay
Next
From: Masahiko Sawada
Date:
Subject: Re: Small documentation improvement for ALTER SUBSCRIPTION