ignite-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Maksim Stepachev <maksim.stepac...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Best way to re-encrypt existing data (TDE cache key rotation).
Date Mon, 05 Oct 2020 12:30:25 GMT
Hi,

I'm going to do it.

сб, 3 окт. 2020 г. в 21:47, Alex Plehanov <plehanov.alex@gmail.com>:

> Hello guys,
>
> I've finished the review and approved the patch.
> Anybody else would like to review it?
>
> пн, 28 сент. 2020 г. в 11:38, Pavel Pereslegin <xxtern@gmail.com>:
>
> > Hello, Maksim!
> >
> > I am currently working on a review notes from Alexey Plekhanov, will
> > let you know when I finish.
> >
> > пн, 28 сент. 2020 г. в 11:04, Maksim Stepachev <
> maksim.stepachev@gmail.com
> > >:
> > >
> > > Hi, Pavel.
> > >
> > > As I see, the ticket [
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12843
> > ]
> > > is "PATCH AVAILABLE". Is this ticket finished?
> > >
> > > чт, 13 авг. 2020 г. в 13:49, Pavel Pereslegin <xxtern@gmail.com>:
> > >
> > > > Hello all.
> > > >
> > > > I'm working on TDE cache group key rotation [1] and I have a couple
> of
> > > > questions about partition re-encryption.
> > > >
> > > > As described in the wiki [2], the process of re-encryption at the
> > > > moment consists of sequentially marking memory pages as dirty, this
> > > > process looks not resource-intensive.
> > > > Do you think it is necessary to do this in a multithreaded mode or
> > > > single thread is enough?
> > > > (We started testing re-encryption on dedicated servers (Xeon E5-2680
> > > > 2.4Ghz, SSD Huawei ES3600P 3.2TB, ThrottlingPolicy =
> > > > CHECKPOINT_BUFFER_ONLY) with no speed limit and no load, as a result,
> > > > single-threaded encryption loaded disk within 30%. At the same time,
> > > > the total re-encryption speed was around 60 MB/s, which allows one
> > > > node to re-encrypt 1 TB of data in about 5 hours, and it seems that
> > > > this performance is enough.)
> > > >
> > > > The second question is about the approach to storing the
> re-encryption
> > > > status.
> > > > At the moment, the re-encryption status includes two parameters - the
> > > > total number of pages in the partition at the time of the start of
> > > > re-encryption (int) and the index of the last re-encrypted page
> (int).
> > > > These 8 bytes are stored in the metapage on the checkpoint (which
> > > > ensures that if the checkpoint does not happen, we will continue the
> > > > process from the last page written to disk).
> > > > However, if multithread partition scanning does not make sense, then
> > > > it seems that it is possible to change the implementation and don't
> > > > change the metapage structure. Store only the "pointer" of the
> > > > partition (and the cache group) in the metastore and scan in strict
> > > > order.
> > > > The approach with storing the status in the metapage of the partition
> > > > seems to me more flexible, stable and has a number of advantages over
> > > > the "pointer" approach:
> > > > 1. Since we saving the total number of pages at the re-encryption
> > > > startup - we will not scan extra pages that may be added to the
> > > > partition later.
> > > > 2. We can move partitions between nodes and re-encryption should
> > > > continue from a certain point on the new node.
> > > > 3. If a partition is (re)created during cache group re-encryption, it
> > > > will not be re-encrypted (since its re-encryption status will be
> reset
> > > > and all data is encrypted with the latest encryption key after
> > > > (re)creation.
> > > >
> > > > Do you think single-threaded mode is enough?
> > > > Is it better to keep the re-encryption status in the metapage or
> store
> > > > the "pointer" in the metastore?
> > > >
> > > > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12843
> > > > [2]
> > > >
> >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=95652384#TDE.Phase3.Cachekeyrotation.-Backgroundre-encryption
> > > >
> > > > пт, 31 июл. 2020 г. в 11:09, Pavel Pereslegin <xxtern@gmail.com>:
> > > > >
> > > > > Hello,
> > > > >
> > > > > I'll expand the answer a bit about calculating CRC, the problem is
> > not
> > > > > that it is calculated twice, but that now for encrypted pages,
> > > > > EncryptedFileIO checks physical integrity, and FilePageStore checks
> > > > > the correctness of the encryption key, but from my point of view,
> it
> > > > > should be vice versa - the lower (delegated) FileIO should check
> the
> > > > > physical integrity and EncryptedFileIO should check the correctness
> > of
> > > > > the encryption key.
> > > > >
> > > > > пт, 31 июл. 2020 г. в 10:40, Pavel Pereslegin <xxtern@gmail.com>:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Hello,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > 10. Question - CRC is read in two places encryptionFileIO
and
> > > > > > > filePageStore - what should we do with this?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > We need to calculate the CRC of encrypted data, because we may
be
> > > > > > using the wrong encryption key to decrypt data, in which case
we
> > will
> > > > > > not understand if the physical integrity is violated or the
wrong
> > > > > > encryption key is used.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > 9. Question - How do we optimize when we can check that
this
> > page is
> > > > > > > already encrypted by parallel loading? Maybe we should
do this
> in
> > > > Phase 4?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > To do this, we need to store the encryption key ID in memory
(at
> > > > > > least), but this is not easy to do right now without breaking
> > binary
> > > > > > compatibility.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > 7. Question -the current implementation does not use the
> > throttling
> > > > that
> > > > > > > is implemented in PDS. Users should set the throughput
such as
> 5
> > MB
> > > > per
> > > > > > > second, but not the timeout, packet size, or stream size.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I've added a simple rate limiter for this.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > 8. Question - why we add a lot of system properties?
> > > > > > >> Can you, please, list system properties that should
be moved
> to
> > the
> > > > configuration?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > It's about the background re-encryption properties, for now,
it
> is:
> > > > > > - re-encryption speed limit (in megabytes per second)
> > > > > > - threads count used for re-encryption
> > > > > > - count of pages in batch, processed under checkpoint lock
> > > > > > - flag to completely disable background re-encryption
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > 11. We should remember about complicated test scenarios
with
> > failover
> > > > > >
> > > > > > PR contains tests for re-encryption (and key rotation) on
> unstable
> > > > > > topology (with baseline change and without it). I'll expand
them
> > if I
> > > > > > missed some cases.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > 13. Will re-encryption continue after the cluster is completely
> > > > stopped?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Yes, as I mentioned earlier, we save the re-encryption status
in
> > the
> > > > > > meta page of each re-encrypted partition and trigger
> re-encryption
> > on
> > > > > > node startup if needed (more detailed description on the wiki).
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks a lot for your comments, I am still working on PR and
> > expanding
> > > > > > wiki documentation. I'll let you know when it will be ready
for
> the
> > > > > > review.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > вт, 28 июл. 2020 г. в 19:14, Alexey Goncharuk <
> > > > alexey.goncharuk@gmail.com>:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hello Nikolay,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > 10. Question - CRC is read in two places encryptionFileIO
> and
> > > > > > > > filePageStore - what should we do with this?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > filePageStore checks CRC of the encrypted page. This
required
> > to
> > > > confirm
> > > > > > > > the page not corrupted on the disk.
> > > > > > > > encryptionFileIO checks CRC of the decrypted page(CRC
itself
> > > > stored in the
> > > > > > > > encrypted data).
> > > > > > > > This required to be sure the decrypted page contains
correct
> > data
> > > > and not
> > > > > > > > replaced with some malicious content.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I still do not see why we need CRC twice, can you please
> > elaborate
> > > > on this
> > > > > > > statement? If an attacker is able to replace the contents
of an
> > > > encrypted
> > > > > > > page, it means that they have access to the encryption
key.
> What
> > will
> > > > > > > prevent them from calculating the CRC of malicious content
and
> > then
> > > > > > > encrypting it?
> > > >
> >
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message