summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/6c/1796e43dc763396f06c55986f8fbb4233662f6
blob: 32aa4dddba09e54b2e2e864abc9e5e90acb00d90 (plain)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
Received: from sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.193]
	helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
	by sfs-ml-1.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
	(envelope-from <capibara@xs4all.nl>) id 1R0XmM-0004jG-F8
	for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
	Mon, 05 Sep 2011 11:55:54 +0000
X-ACL-Warn: 
Received: from smtp-vbr8.xs4all.nl ([194.109.24.28])
	by sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
	id 1R0XmH-0001Sy-TN for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
	Mon, 05 Sep 2011 11:55:54 +0000
Received: from webmail.xs4all.nl (dovemail18.xs4all.nl [194.109.26.20])
	by smtp-vbr8.xs4all.nl (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id p85Btcs1028192;
	Mon, 5 Sep 2011 13:55:38 +0200 (CEST)
	(envelope-from capibara@xs4all.nl)
Received: from 92.70.45.2 (SquirrelMail authenticated user rmeijer)
	by webmail.xs4all.nl with HTTP; Mon, 5 Sep 2011 13:55:43 +0200
Message-ID: <676b6b58ece6f8f3c4ee8abdebce9e29.squirrel@webmail.xs4all.nl>
In-Reply-To: <4E61531E.3050109@nilsschneider.net>
References: <4aa4401704cc1e7a1665971b79684a83.squirrel@webmail.xs4all.nl>
	<d6060149473a3262940e624e13e6e061.squirrel@webmail.xs4all.nl>
	<4E61531E.3050109@nilsschneider.net>
Date: Mon, 5 Sep 2011 13:55:43 +0200
From: "Rob Meijer" <capibara@xs4all.nl>
To: "Nils Schneider" <nils@nilsschneider.net>
User-Agent: SquirrelMail/1.4.18
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Virus-Scanned: by XS4ALL Virus Scanner
X-Spam-Score: -0.5 (/)
X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net.
	See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details.
	-0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/,
	no trust [194.109.24.28 listed in list.dnswl.org]
	-0.5 RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay
	domain
X-Headers-End: 1R0XmH-0001Sy-TN
Cc: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] BitCoin and MinorFs/AppArmor
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
Reply-To: rmeijer@xs4all.nl
List-Id: <bitcoin-development.lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
	<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_name=bitcoin-development>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
	<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 05 Sep 2011 11:55:54 -0000

On Sat, September 3, 2011 00:05, Nils Schneider wrote:
> MinorFs sounds like an interesting concept and but wallet encryption
> (already being tested and close to release) is a simpler solution for
> end-users.

I think the two could be considered complementary. Basicaly the existing
MinorFs provides to the pseudo-persistent-process that private members
provide to objects. 'Encapsulation of variables that still can be
delegated by the object that encapsulates them'. In the MinorFs2 that I
just started writing, I try to lower the barrier to using MinorFs by
providing facilities to do pick a granularity for 'object' more suitable
for most lines of development (where pseudo persistent processes are an
unnatural concept).

Think of BitCoin running as user certain user as an object and a piece of
malware running as the same user as a second object. You can than think of
the users home directory as a global variable, while MinorFs gives a
private home to both the bitcoin object and the malware object. The
bitcoin object can delegate parts of its private state to other objects,
but as long as bit-coin doesn't do that, the private state won't be
disclosed.

Its a good idea to have data on disk encrypted even if you use something
like Minorfs, if only to protect against bootable media attacks.

> Would MinorFs help securing the wallet on a server, maybe even a
> (insecure) VPS?

No.

> Can it work without changes to Bitcoin? If not, what is the minimal
> amount of changes needed?

Basically the existing MinorFs will work already with the existing BitCoin
due to the fact that Bitcoin seems to extract $HOME from an environment
variable, but there are some caveats:

* It needs a bash script for starting up bitcoin with $HOME set to the
  MinorFs home.
* Bitcoin can be started in only one way. That is, bitcoin started from
the gnome menu is interpret being a completely differnt bitcoin than
bitcoin started from an xterm.
* There can only be one bitcoin started and running at once.
* All potential malware needs to run with at least an AppArmor profile
that keeps it from reading /proc/$PID for pids other than itself.

In the new version I'm contemplating, there would I think at least be a
minor change to bitcoin needed:

* bitcoin would have to use a small library that provides a
'minorfs_getpwuid' function.

This function will work like getpwuid on any system without an active
MinorFs2, and for any non apparmor confined process.
On a system with MinorFs running it should return a passwd structure with
the home changed to the MinorFs2 home.

> Is there any guarantee it will never corrupt the wallet?

All read and write operations will map directly to the underlying
file-system, so basically it comes with the same lack of guarantee that
any
file-system comes with once the underlying media becomes flaky.

> What would be the proper way to do backups?

Haven't really thought about that, what is considered the currently proper
way to keep backups for bitcoin?

> On 02.09.2011 22:32, Rob Meijer wrote:
>> Given that there was not a single response to my post, I gather there is
>> no to little interest in an updated MinorFs that could be used by
>> bitcoin
>> on systems that support AppArmor (Ubuntu and OpenSuse).
>>
>> Nevertheless I've put down the initial set of specs for a rewrite of
>> MinorFs for if anyone would like to comment on them to make a future
>> match
>> with Bitcoin more likely, I'm open to all sugestions:
>>
>> http://minorfs.polacanthus.net/wiki/Concepts_for_MinorFs2
>>
>> On Fri, August 26, 2011 09:48, Rob Meijer wrote:
>>> A few years ago I wrote a least authority based set of filesystems
>>> named
>>> MinorFs that worked closely together with AppArmor (suse/ubuntu) to
>>> give '
>>> pseudo persistent processes' their own private but decomposable and
>>> delegatable piece of filesystem storage:
>>>
>>> http://www.linuxjournal.com/magazine/minorfs
>>> http://www.capibara.com/blog/2011/05/25/taming-mutable-state-for-file-systems/
>>>
>>> Currently there is only one perfect fit for MinorFs and that's the
>>> stack
>>> AppArmor/MinorFs/E-language-persistent-application. There are some
>>> close
>>> fits like running ssh without a passphrase (
>>> http://minorfs.polacanthus.net/wiki/Ssh_private_keys_without_passphrase
>>> )
>>> but these require lots of manual fiddling by the user to get working.
>>> The
>>> ssh trick would probably work with bitcoin, but as you can see from the
>>> link above, it would be rather cumbersome.
>>>
>>> I am trying to get specs together for rewriting MinorFs (in Python) in
>>> a
>>> way that would make it easy and natural for application developers that
>>> want their application to be able to protect user data (like bitcoin
>>> wallets) from mallware running under the same uid as that user.
>>>
>>> Currently minorfs granularity is hard fixed to that of the 'pseudo
>>> persistent process', and that granularity is determined as described in
>>> the following link:
>>>
>>> http://minorfs.polacanthus.net/wiki/Pseudo_persistent_process
>>>
>>> When using pseudo persistent processes, you basically end up with
>>> file-system storage that follows almost all of the modeling principles
>>> of
>>> the object capability model. This is great when designing a least
>>> authority program from scratch and writing it in the (object
>>> capability)
>>> e-language using its persistence facilities.
>>>
>>> Given however that I don't expect bitcoin, openssh, chrome, firefox, or
>>> any other application that would benefit from what MinorFs provides to
>>> be
>>> rewritten in E, it seems like the next version of MinorFs should give
>>> up
>>> on the purity of its least authority model, and take an approach that
>>> better suits common development languages and practices.
>>>
>>> With bitcoin being a project that could benefit most from what MinorFs
>>> has
>>> to offer, I would like to ask bitcoin developers to think about what
>>> attributes from the current granularity level (pseudo persistent
>>> process)
>>> should be kept, what attributes should be dropped, and what properties
>>> should be added to arrive at an 'id' that is the best fit for
>>> granularity
>>> of persistent private storage for bitcoin.
>>>
>>> I really want to accommodate bitcoin developer needs in this, so all
>>> input
>>> that helps me help you guys to get the next MinorFs version to
>>> accommodate
>>> your needs to a level that code to use MinorFs where available can be
>>> added to bitcoin, would be extremely welcome.
>>>
>>> Let me know what you think,
>>>
>>> Rob
>>>
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> EMC VNX: the world's simplest storage, starting under $10K
>>> The only unified storage solution that offers unified management
>>> Up to 160% more powerful than alternatives and 25% more efficient.
>>> Guaranteed. http://p.sf.net/sfu/emc-vnx-dev2dev
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Bitcoin-development mailing list
>>> Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Special Offer -- Download ArcSight Logger for FREE!
>> Finally, a world-class log management solution at an even better
>> price-free! And you'll get a free "Love Thy Logs" t-shirt when you
>> download Logger. Secure your free ArcSight Logger TODAY!
>> http://p.sf.net/sfu/arcsisghtdev2dev
>> _______________________________________________
>> Bitcoin-development mailing list
>> Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Special Offer -- Download ArcSight Logger for FREE!
> Finally, a world-class log management solution at an even better
> price-free! And you'll get a free "Love Thy Logs" t-shirt when you
> download Logger. Secure your free ArcSight Logger TODAY!
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/arcsisghtdev2dev
> _______________________________________________
> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>
>