Re: [Proposal] Table-level Transparent Data Encryption (TDE) and KeyManagement Service (KMS) - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Joe Conway
Subject Re: [Proposal] Table-level Transparent Data Encryption (TDE) and KeyManagement Service (KMS)
Date
Msg-id c35cb9d6-bbfc-fb04-4517-9acd1f6f1d1a@joeconway.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [Proposal] Table-level Transparent Data Encryption (TDE) and KeyManagement Service (KMS)  (Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>)
Responses Re: [Proposal] Table-level Transparent Data Encryption (TDE) and KeyManagement Service (KMS)
List pgsql-hackers
On 7/8/19 10:19 AM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> When people are asking for multiple keys (not just for key rotation),
> they are asking to have multiple keys that can be supplied by users only
> when they need to access the data.  Yes, the keys are always in the
> datbase, but the feature request is that they are only unlocked when the
> user needs to access the data.  Obviously, that will not work for
> autovacuum when the encryption is at the block level.

> If the key is always unlocked, there is questionable security value of
> having multiple keys, beyond key rotation.

That is not true. Having multiple keys also allows you to reduce the
amount of data encrypted with a single key, which is desirable because:

1. It makes cryptanalysis more difficult
2. Puts less data at risk if someone gets "lucky" in doing brute force


Joe

--
Crunchy Data - http://crunchydata.com
PostgreSQL Support for Secure Enterprises
Consulting, Training, & Open Source Development


Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Broken defenses against dropping a partitioning column
Next
From: Alexander Korotkov
Date:
Subject: Re: Add missing operator <->(box, point)