mirror of
https://github.com/tahoe-lafs/tahoe-lafs.git
synced 2025-04-07 10:56:49 +00:00
document our current directory node (dirnode) design
This commit is contained in:
parent
241b2537ad
commit
8a4c174ce9
414
docs/dirnodes.txt
Normal file
414
docs/dirnodes.txt
Normal file
@ -0,0 +1,414 @@
|
||||
|
||||
= Tahoe Directory Nodes =
|
||||
|
||||
As explained in the architecture docs, Tahoe can be roughly viewed as a
|
||||
collection of three layers. The lowest layer is the distributed filestore, or
|
||||
DHT: it provides operations that accept files and upload them to the mesh,
|
||||
creating a URI in the process which securely references the file's contents.
|
||||
The middle layer is the filesystem, creating a structure of directories and
|
||||
filenames resembling the traditional unix/windows filesystems. The top layer
|
||||
is the application layer, which uses the lower layers to provide useful
|
||||
services to users, like a backup application, or a way to share files with
|
||||
friends.
|
||||
|
||||
This document examines the middle layer, the "filesystem".
|
||||
|
||||
== DHT Primitives ==
|
||||
|
||||
In the lowest layer (DHT), we've defined two operations thus far, both of
|
||||
which refer to "CHK URIs", which reference immutable data:
|
||||
|
||||
chk_uri = put(data)
|
||||
data = get(chk_uri)
|
||||
|
||||
We anticipate creating mutable slots in the DHT layer at some point, which
|
||||
will add some new operations to this layer:
|
||||
|
||||
slotname = create_slot()
|
||||
set(slotname, data)
|
||||
data = get(slotname)
|
||||
|
||||
== Filesystem Goals ==
|
||||
|
||||
The main goal for the middle (filesystem) layer is to give users a way to
|
||||
organize the data that they have uploaded into the mesh. The traditional way
|
||||
to do this in computer filesystems is to put this data into files, give those
|
||||
files names, and collect these names into directories.
|
||||
|
||||
Each directory is a series of name-value pairs, which maps "child name" to an
|
||||
object of some kind. Those child objects might be files, or they might be
|
||||
other directories.
|
||||
|
||||
The directory structure is therefore a directed graph of nodes, in which each
|
||||
node might be a directory node or a file node. All file nodes are terminal
|
||||
nodes.
|
||||
|
||||
== Dirnode Goals ==
|
||||
|
||||
What properties might be desireable for these directory nodes? In no
|
||||
particular order:
|
||||
|
||||
1: functional. Code which does not work doesn't count.
|
||||
2: easy to document, explain, and understand
|
||||
3: private: it should not be possible for others to see the contents of a
|
||||
directory
|
||||
4: integrity: it should not be possible for others to modify the contents
|
||||
of a directory
|
||||
5: available: directories should survive host failure, just like files do
|
||||
6: efficient: in storage, communication bandwidth, number of round-trips
|
||||
7: easy to delegate individual directories in a flexible way
|
||||
8: updateness: everybody looking at a directory should see the same contents
|
||||
9: monotonicity: everybody looking at a directory should see the same
|
||||
sequence of updates
|
||||
|
||||
We do not meet all of these goals. For the current release, we favored #1,
|
||||
#2, and #7 above the rest, which lead us to the following design. In a later
|
||||
#section, we discuss some alternate designs and potential changes to the
|
||||
#existing code that can help us achieve the other goals.
|
||||
|
||||
In tahoe-0.4.0, each "dirnode" is stored as a file on a single "vdrive
|
||||
server". The name of this file is an unguessable string. The contents are an
|
||||
encrypted representation of the directory's name-to-child mapping. Foolscap
|
||||
is used to provide remote access to this file. A collection of "directory
|
||||
URIs" are used to hold all the parameters necessary to access, read, and
|
||||
write this dirnode.
|
||||
|
||||
== Dirnode secret values ==
|
||||
|
||||
Each dirnode begins life as a "writekey", a randomly-generated AES key. This
|
||||
key is hashed (using a tagged hash, see src/allmydata/util/hashutil.py for
|
||||
details) to form the "readkey". The readkey is hashed to form the "storage
|
||||
index". The writekey is hashed with a different tag to form the "write
|
||||
enabler".
|
||||
|
||||
Clients who have read-write access to the dirnode know the writekey, and can
|
||||
derive all the other secrets from it. Clients with merely read-only access to
|
||||
the dirnode know the readkey (and can derive the storage index), but do not
|
||||
know the writekey or the write enabler. The vdrive server knows only the
|
||||
storage index and the write enabler.
|
||||
|
||||
== Dirnode capability URIs ==
|
||||
|
||||
The "write capability" for a dirnode grants read-write access to its
|
||||
contents. This is expressed on concrete form as the "dirnode write URI": a
|
||||
printable string which contains the following pieces of information:
|
||||
|
||||
furl of the vdrive server hosting this dirnode
|
||||
writekey
|
||||
|
||||
The "read capability" grants read-only access to a dirnode, and its "dirnode
|
||||
read URI" contains:
|
||||
|
||||
furl of the vdrive server hosting this dirnode
|
||||
readkey
|
||||
|
||||
For example,
|
||||
URI:DIR:pb://xextf3eap44o3wi27mf7ehiur6wvhzr6@207.7.153.180:56677,127.0.0.1:56677/vdrive:shrrn75qq3x7uxfzk326ncahd4======
|
||||
is a write-capability URI, while
|
||||
URI:DIR-RO:pb://xextf3eap44o3wi27mf7ehiur6wvhzr6@207.7.153.180:56677,127.0.0.1:56677/vdrive:4c2legsthoe52qywuaturgwdrm======
|
||||
is a read-capability URI, both for the same dirnode.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
== Dirnode storage format ==
|
||||
|
||||
Each dirnode is stored in a single file, saved on the vdrive server, using
|
||||
the (base32-encoded) storage index as a filename. The contents of this file
|
||||
are a serialized dictionary which maps H_name (explained below) to a tuple
|
||||
with three values: (E_name, E_write, E_read). The vdrive server is made
|
||||
available as a Foolscap "Referenceable" object, with the following
|
||||
operations:
|
||||
|
||||
create_dirnode(index, write_enabler) -> None
|
||||
list(index) -> list of (E_name, E_write, E_read) tuples
|
||||
get(index, H_name) -> (E_write, E_read)
|
||||
set(index, write_enabler, H_name, E_name, E_write, E_read)
|
||||
delete(index, write_enabler, H_name)
|
||||
|
||||
For any given entry of this dictionary, the following values are obtained by
|
||||
hashing or encryption:
|
||||
|
||||
H_name is the hash of the readkey and the child's name.
|
||||
E_name is the child's name, encrypted with the readkey
|
||||
E_write is the child's write-URI, encrypted with the writekey
|
||||
E_read is the child's read-URI, encrypted with the readkey
|
||||
|
||||
All encryption uses AES in CTR mode, in which the high-order 10 or 12 bytes
|
||||
of the 16-byte key are used as an IV (randomly chosen each time the data is
|
||||
changed), and the remaining bytes are used as the CTR-mode offset. An
|
||||
HMAC-SHA256 is computed for each encrypted value and stored alongside. The
|
||||
stored E_name/E_write/E_read values are thus the concatenation of IV,
|
||||
encrypted data, and HMAC.
|
||||
|
||||
When a new dirnode is created, it records the write_enabler. All operations
|
||||
that modify an existing dirnode (set and delete) require the write_enabler be
|
||||
presented.
|
||||
|
||||
This approach insures that clients who do not have the read or write keys
|
||||
(including the vdrive server, which knows the storage index but not the keys)
|
||||
will be unable to see any of the contents of the dirnode. Clients who have
|
||||
the readkey but not the writekey will not be allowed to modify the dirnode.
|
||||
The H_name value allows clients to perform lookups of specific keys rather
|
||||
than requiring them to download the whole dirnode for each operation.
|
||||
|
||||
By putting both read-only and read-write child access capabilities in each
|
||||
entry, encrypted by different keys, this approach provides transitive
|
||||
read-only-ness: if a client has only a readkey for the parent dirnode, they
|
||||
will only get readkeys (and not writekeys) for any children, including other
|
||||
directories. When we create mutable slots in the mesh and we start having
|
||||
read-write file URIs, we can use the same approach to insure that read-only
|
||||
access to a directory means read-only access to the files as well.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
== Design Goals, redux ==
|
||||
|
||||
How well does this design meet the goals?
|
||||
|
||||
#1 functional: YES: the code works and has extensive unit tests
|
||||
#2 documentable: YES: this document is the existence proof
|
||||
#3 private: MOSTLY: see the discussion below
|
||||
#4 integrity: MOSTLY: the vdrive server can rollback individual slots
|
||||
#5 availability: BARELY: if the vdrive server is offline, the dirnode will
|
||||
be unuseable. If the vdrive server fails,
|
||||
the dirnode will be lost forever.
|
||||
#6 efficient: MOSTLY:
|
||||
network: single dirnode lookup is very efficient, since clients can
|
||||
fetch specific keys rather than being required to get or set
|
||||
the entire dirnode each time. Traversing many directories
|
||||
takes a lot of roundtrips, and these can't be collapsed with
|
||||
promise-pipelining because the intermediate values must only
|
||||
be visible to the client. Modifying many dirnodes at once
|
||||
(e.g. importing a large pre-existing directory tree) is pretty
|
||||
slow, since each graph edge must be created independently.
|
||||
storage: each child has a separate IV, which makes them larger than
|
||||
if all children were aggregated into a single encrypted string
|
||||
#7 delegation: VERY: each dirnode is a completely independent object,
|
||||
to which clients can be granted separate read-write or
|
||||
read-only access
|
||||
#8 updateness: VERY: with only a single point of access, and no caching,
|
||||
each client operation starts by fetching the current
|
||||
value, so there are no opportunities for staleness
|
||||
#9 monotonicity: VERY: the single point of access also protects against
|
||||
retrograde motion
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
=== Privacy leaks in the vdrive server ===
|
||||
|
||||
Dirnodes are very private against other clients: traffic between the client
|
||||
and the vdrive server is protected by the Foolscap SSL connection, so they
|
||||
can observe very little. Storage index values are hashes of secrets and thus
|
||||
unguessable, and they are not made public, so other clients cannot snoop
|
||||
through encrypted dirnodes that they have not been told about.
|
||||
|
||||
On the other hand, the vdrive server gets to see the access patterns of each
|
||||
client who is using dirnodes hosted there. The childnames and URIs are
|
||||
encrypted and not visible to anyone (including the vdrive server), but the
|
||||
vdrive server is in a good position to infer a lot of data about the
|
||||
directory structure. It knows the length of all childnames, and from the
|
||||
length of the child URIs themselves it can tell whether children are file
|
||||
URIs vs. directory URIs vs read-only directory URIs. By watching a client's
|
||||
access patterns it can deduce the connection between (encrypted) child 1 and
|
||||
target directory 2 (i.e. if the client does a 'get' of the first child, then
|
||||
immediately does an operation on directory 2, it can assume the two are
|
||||
related. From this the vdrive server can build a graph with the same shape as
|
||||
the filesystem, even though the nodes and edges will be unlabled.
|
||||
|
||||
By providing CHK-level storage services as well (or colluding with a server
|
||||
who is), the vdrive server can infer the storage index of file nodes that are
|
||||
downloaded shortly after their childname is looked up.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
=== Integrity failures in the vdrive server ===
|
||||
|
||||
The HMAC prevents the vdrive server from modifying the child names or child
|
||||
URI values without detection: changing a few bytes will cause an HMAC failure
|
||||
that the client can detect. This means the vdrive server can make the dirnode
|
||||
unavailable, but not corrupt it.
|
||||
|
||||
However, the vdrive server can perform a rollback attack: either replacing an
|
||||
individual entry in the encrypted table with an old version, or replacing the
|
||||
entire table. Despite not knowing what the child names or URIs are, the
|
||||
vdrive server can undo changes made by authorized clients. It could also
|
||||
perform selective rollback, showing different clients different versions of
|
||||
the filesystem. To solve this problem either requires mutable data (like a
|
||||
sequence number or hash) to be stored in the URI which points to this dirnode
|
||||
(rendering them non-constant, and losing most of their value), or requires
|
||||
spreading the dirnode out over multiple non-colluding servers (which might
|
||||
improve availability but makes updateness and monotonicity harder).
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
=== Improving the availability of dirnodes ===
|
||||
|
||||
Clearly it is somewhat disappointing to have a sexy distributed filestore at
|
||||
the bottom layer and then have a single-point-of-failure vdrive server on top
|
||||
of it. However, this approach meets many of the design goals and is extremely
|
||||
simple to explain and implement. There are many avenues to improve the
|
||||
reliability and availability of dirnodes. (note that reliability and
|
||||
availability can be separate goals).
|
||||
|
||||
A simple way to improve the reliability of dirnodes would be to make the
|
||||
vdrive server be responsible for saving the dirnode contents in a fashion
|
||||
that will survive the failure of its local disk, for example by simply
|
||||
rsync'ing all the dirnodes off to a separate machine on a periodic basis, and
|
||||
pulling them back in the case of disk failure.
|
||||
|
||||
To improve availability, we must allow clients to access their dirnodes even
|
||||
if the vdrive server is offline. The first step here is to create multiple
|
||||
vdrive servers, putting a list of furls into the DIR:URI, with instructions
|
||||
to update all of them during write, and accept the first answer that comes
|
||||
back during read. This introduces issues of updateness and monotonicity: if a
|
||||
dirnode is changed while one of the vdrive servers is offline, the servers
|
||||
will diverge, and subsequent clients will see different contents depending
|
||||
upon which server they ask.
|
||||
|
||||
A more comforting way to improve both reliability and availability is to
|
||||
spread the dirnodes out over the mesh in the same way that CHK files work.
|
||||
The general name for this approach is the "SSK directory slot", a structure
|
||||
for keeping a mutable slot on multiple hosts, setting and retrieving its
|
||||
contents at various times, and reconciling differences by comparing sequence
|
||||
numbers. The "slot name" is the hash of a public key, which is also used to
|
||||
sign updates, such that the SSK storage hosts will only accept updates from
|
||||
those in possession of the corresponding private key. This approach (although
|
||||
not yet implemented) will provide fairly good reliability and availability
|
||||
properties, at the expense of complexity and updateness/monotonicity. It can
|
||||
also improve integrity, since an attacker would have to corrupt multiple
|
||||
storage servers to successfully perform a rollback attack.
|
||||
|
||||
Reducing centralization can improve reliability, as long as the overall
|
||||
reliability of the mesh is greater than the reliability of the original
|
||||
centralized services.
|
||||
|
||||
=== Improving the efficiency of dirnodes ===
|
||||
|
||||
By storing each child of a dirnode in a separate element of the dictionary,
|
||||
we provide efficient directory traversal and clean+simple dirnode delegation
|
||||
behavior. This comes at the cost of efficiency for other operations,
|
||||
specifically things that operation on multiple dirnodes at once.
|
||||
|
||||
When a backup program is run for the first time, it needs to copy a large
|
||||
amount of data from a pre-existing filesystem into reliable storage. This
|
||||
means that a large and complex directory structure needs to be duplicated in
|
||||
the dirnode layer. With the one-object-per-dirnode approach described here,
|
||||
this requires as many operations as there are edges in the imported
|
||||
filesystem graph.
|
||||
|
||||
Another approach would be to aggregate multiple directories into a single
|
||||
storage object. This object would contain a serialized graph rather than a
|
||||
single name-to-child dictionary. Most directory operations would fetch the
|
||||
whole block of data (and presumeably cache it for a while to avoid lots of
|
||||
re-fetches), and modification operations would need to replace the whole
|
||||
thing at once. This "realm" approach would have the added benefit of
|
||||
combining more data into a single encrypted bundle (perhaps hiding the shape
|
||||
of the graph from the vdrive server better), and would reduce round-trips
|
||||
when performing deep directory traversals (assuming the realm was already
|
||||
cached). It would also prevent fine-grained rollback attacks from working:
|
||||
the vdrive server could change the entire dirnode to look like an earlier
|
||||
state, but it could not independently roll back individual edges.
|
||||
|
||||
The drawbacks of this aggregation would be that small accesses (adding a
|
||||
single child, looking up a single child) would require pulling or pushing a
|
||||
lot of unrelated data, increasing network overhead (and necessitating
|
||||
test-and-set semantics for the modification side, which increases the chances
|
||||
that a user operation will fail, making it more challenging to provide
|
||||
promises of atomicity to the user).
|
||||
|
||||
It would also make it much more difficult to enable the delegation
|
||||
("sharing") of specific directories. Since each aggregate "realm" provides
|
||||
all-or-nothing access control, the act of delegating any directory from the
|
||||
middle of the realm would require the realm first be split into the upper
|
||||
piece that isn't being shared and the lower piece that is. This splitting
|
||||
would have to be done in response to what is essentially a read operation,
|
||||
which is not traditionally supposed to be a high-effort action.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
=== Dirnode expiration and leases ===
|
||||
|
||||
Dirnodes are created any time a client wishes to add a new directory. How
|
||||
long do they live? What's to keep them from sticking around forever, taking
|
||||
up space that nobody can reach any longer?
|
||||
|
||||
Our plan is to define the vdrive servers to keep dirnodes alive with
|
||||
"leases". Clients which know and care about specific dirnodes can ask to keep
|
||||
them alive for a while, by renewing a lease on them (with a typical period of
|
||||
one month). Clients are expected to assist in the deletion of dirnodes by
|
||||
canceling their leases as soon as they are done with them. This means that
|
||||
when a client deletes a directory, it should also cancel its lease on that
|
||||
directory. When the lease count on a dirnode goes to zero, the vdrive server
|
||||
can delete the related storage. Multiple clients may all have leases on the
|
||||
same dirnode: the server may delete the dirnode only after all of the leases
|
||||
have gone away.
|
||||
|
||||
We expect that clients will periodically create a "manifest": a list of
|
||||
so-called "refresh capabilities" for all of the dirnodes and files that they
|
||||
can reach. They will give this manifest to the "repairer", which is a service
|
||||
that keeps files (and dirnodes) alive on behalf of clients who cannot take on
|
||||
this responsibility for themselves. These refresh capabilities include the
|
||||
storage index, but do *not* include the readkeys or writekeys, so the
|
||||
repairer does not get to read the files or directories that it is helping to
|
||||
keep alive.
|
||||
|
||||
After each change to the user's vdrive, the client creates a manifest and
|
||||
looks for differences from their previous version. Anything which was removed
|
||||
prompts the client to send out lease-cancellation messages, allowing the data
|
||||
to be deleted.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
== Starting Points: root dirnodes ==
|
||||
|
||||
Any client can record the URI of a directory node in some external form (say,
|
||||
in a local file) and use it as the starting point of later traversal. The
|
||||
current vdrive servers are configured to create a "root" dirnode at startup
|
||||
and publish its URI to the world: this forms the basis of the "global shared
|
||||
vdrive" used in the demonstration application. In addition, client code is
|
||||
currently designed to create a new (unattached) dirnode at startup and record
|
||||
its URI: this forms the root of the "per-user private vdrive" presented as
|
||||
the "~" directory.
|
||||
|
||||
== Mounting and Sharing Directories ==
|
||||
|
||||
The biggest benefit of this dirnode approach is that sharing individual
|
||||
directories is almost trivial. Alice creates a subdirectory that she wants to
|
||||
use to share files with Bob. This subdirectory is attached to Alice's
|
||||
filesystem at "~alice/share-with-bob". She asks her filesystem for the
|
||||
read-write directory URI for that new directory, and emails it to Bob. When
|
||||
Bob receives the URI, he asks his own local vdrive to attach the given URI,
|
||||
perhaps at a place named "~bob/shared-with-alice". Every time either party
|
||||
writes a file into this directory, the other will be able to read it. If
|
||||
Alice prefers, she can give a read-only URI to Bob instead, and then Bob will
|
||||
be able to read files but not change the contents of the directory. Neither
|
||||
Alice nor Bob will get access to any files above the mounted directory: there
|
||||
are no 'parent directory' pointers. If Alice creates a nested set of
|
||||
directories, "~alice/share-with-bob/subdir2", and gives a read-only URI to
|
||||
share-with-bob to Bob, then Bob will be unable to write to either
|
||||
share-with-bob/ or subdir2/.
|
||||
|
||||
A suitable UI needs to be created to allow users to easily perform this
|
||||
sharing action: dragging a folder their vdrive to an IM or email user icon,
|
||||
for example. The UI will need to give the sending user an opportunity to
|
||||
indicate whether they want to grant read-write or read-only access to the
|
||||
recipient. The recipient then needs an interface to drag the new folder into
|
||||
their vdrive and give it a home.
|
||||
|
||||
== Revocation ==
|
||||
|
||||
When Alice decides that she no longer wants Bob to be able to access the
|
||||
shared directory, what should she do? Suppose she's shared this folder with
|
||||
both Bob and Carol, and now she wants Carol to retain access to it but Bob to
|
||||
be shut out. Ideally Carol should not have to do anything: her access should
|
||||
continue unabated.
|
||||
|
||||
The current plan is to have her client create a deep copy of the folder in
|
||||
question, delegate access to the new folder to the remaining members of the
|
||||
group (Carol), asking the lucky survivors to replace their old reference with
|
||||
the new one. Bob may still have access to the old folder, but he is now the
|
||||
only one who cares: everyone else has moved on, and he will no longer be able
|
||||
to see their new changes. In a strict sense, this is the strongest form of
|
||||
revocation that can be accomplished: there is no point trying to force Bob to
|
||||
forget about the files that he read a moment before being kicked out. In
|
||||
addition it must be noted that anyone who can access the directory can proxy
|
||||
for Bob, reading files to him and accepting changes whenever he wants.
|
||||
Preventing delegation between communication parties is just as pointless as
|
||||
asking Bob to forget previously accessed files. However, there may be value
|
||||
to configuring the UI to ask Carol to not share files with Bob, or to
|
||||
removing all files from Bob's view at the same time his access is revoked.
|
||||
|
Loading…
x
Reference in New Issue
Block a user