Date: Fri, 07 Mar 2008 07:56:03 -0600 From: Ralph Weber <roweber@IEEE.org> To: "'t10@t10.org'" <t10@t10.org> Subject: Re: LU+Volume+"global" keys X-Message-Number: 8586 Formatted message: HTML-formatted message Sivan, I appear to have the wrong understanding of SCSI target device credentials. What I have read so far in CbCS says that SCSI target device credentials are used only with well-known logical units. Therefore, the "global" key described below applies only to enforcement manager actions on behalf of a well-known logical unit. Since the tape drives that are used to access volumes are never well-known logical unit, it appears to me that the "global" key case described below does not exist. All the best, .Ralph Sivan Tal wrote: > Well, the enforcement manager will have to figure it out, but I don't think > this is an issue because the command is received at a logical unit or > device. If the enforcement manager is contained in a device server, then it > is contained in a logical unit (per the CbCS UML diagram) and it should use > the logical unit's key. If it is contained in a target device, it should > use the device's "global" key. There is a clause on shared keys that > explain the distinction between LU keys and global keys. > > Regards, Sivan. > > owner-t10@t10.org wrote on 03/06/2008 05:41:00 PM: > > >> * From the T10 Reflector (t10@t10.org), posted by: >> * Ralph Weber <roweber@ieee.org> >> * >> Sivan Tal wrote: >> >>> <snip> >>> >>> Comment 4: >>> The RECEIVE CREDENTIAL command must always include a logical unit (or >>> > SCSI > >>> device) and optionally a volume designator. When CbCS is used with >>> > volumes, > >>> the Capability field only contains identification of the volume, but >>> > the > >>> request must also include identification of the LU through which the >>> > volume > >>> is to be accessed. This allows the Security Manager to use the right >>> > shared > >>> key for the ICV. The new way you constructed the CDB allows for either >>> > LU > >>> or volume identifier. It should be either LU or LU+volume. >>> >> Since the LU information is not in the capability, how does >> the enforcement manager determine the correct shared key >> for use in its reconstruction of the capkey? >> >> I spoke with Kevin about this, and the intention is to make this >> credential format applicable to a volume regardless of the LU in >> which it is mounted. Therefore, I am concerned that there are >> some undesirable hidden connections here. >> >> All the best, >> >> .Ralph >> >> * >> * For T10 Reflector information, send a message with >> * 'info t10' (no quotes) in the message body to majordomo@t10.org >> > > > > >