Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Better way to handle recovery keys #3016

Open
schiessle opened this issue Jan 10, 2017 · 4 comments
Open

Better way to handle recovery keys #3016

schiessle opened this issue Jan 10, 2017 · 4 comments
Labels

Comments

@schiessle
Copy link
Member

At the moment we create a recovery key-pair and use the public key to encrypt all files if the user enabled the recovery feature. Basically the recovery key works like a additional user to whom all files are shared. This can have some performance impacts if a user enable/disable the recovery key with a lot of files.

Therefore the idea is to make a copy of the users private key, encrypted with the recovery password. In this case we only have to copy one file (the private key) to a backup location and encrypt it with the recovery password instead of updating every individual file key. Also disabling the recovery key is much easier because we just need to delete the copy of the private key. The performance of the recovery process would also improve significantly because on recovery we no longer have to decrypt/re-encrypt all file keys but just copy over the backup of the private key and re-encrypt the private key with the users new password.

Only thing which needs to keep in mind:

  • If there are situations where we replace the users private key we also need to update the backup created for recovery.

This was a idea from @jknockaert. I just decided to summarize it here to make sure that it doesn't get lost. If I missed something, feel free to add it. If you have some time and want to implement it feel free to assign the issue to yourself.

@schiessle
Copy link
Member Author

copied the issue over from owncloud/core#18951

@jknockaert would you be still interested to work on it?

@jknockaert
Copy link
Contributor

@schiessle I will first have to invest time in building a platform to host nextcloud, after that I will migrate to nextcloud, and after that I may take up developing something useful. In the meantime don't hold your breath.

@schiessle
Copy link
Member Author

@jknockaert thanks for your feedback... Take your time... I'm happy to welcome you back at any time! 😃

@nextcloud-bot nextcloud-bot added the stale Ticket or PR with no recent activity label Jun 20, 2018
@skjnldsv skjnldsv added the 1. to develop Accepted and waiting to be taken care of label Jun 12, 2019
@ghost ghost removed the stale Ticket or PR with no recent activity label Jun 12, 2019
@szaimen

This comment has been minimized.

@szaimen szaimen closed this as completed May 21, 2021
@szaimen szaimen reopened this May 27, 2021
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

5 participants