Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2014 20:09:10 +0100 From: =?iso-8859-2?Q?Edward_Tomasz_Napiera=B3a?= <trasz@FreeBSD.org> To: Alan Somers <asomers@FreeBSD.org> Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org, Darren Pilgrim <list_freebsd@bluerosetech.com> Subject: Re: [FreeBSD-Announce] FreeBSD Errata Notice FreeBSD-EN-14:01.random Message-ID: <E7EB3D19-13E6-481D-B724-0DFF10FFBBCF@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <CAOtMX2in=E67i-jXoBX=aU3L7az3so45ojBrNVM%2BO222DyjJ2Q@mail.gmail.com> References: <201401142011.s0EKBoi7082738@freefall.freebsd.org> <52D6BF9C.8070405@bluerosetech.com> <52D6D5C7.80200@sentex.net> <52D6D93F.7020600@bluerosetech.com> <CAOtMX2in=E67i-jXoBX=aU3L7az3so45ojBrNVM%2BO222DyjJ2Q@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Wiadomo=B6=E6 napisana przez Alan Somers w dniu 15 sty 2014, o godz. = 20:25: > On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 11:53 AM, Darren Pilgrim > <list_freebsd@bluerosetech.com> wrote: >> On 1/15/2014 10:39 AM, Mike Tancsa wrote: >>>=20 >>> On 1/15/2014 12:04 PM, Darren Pilgrim wrote: >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>> 1. If you're on "bare metal", the attacker has firmware-level or >>>> physical access to the machine; >>>> 2. If you're on a hypervisor, you can't trust the hypervisor; >>>>=20 >>>> In both cases, I would think the attacker can use much simpler, = more >>>> direct vectors and you have much worse things to worry about than = the >>>> quality of /dev/random. I'm not questioning the validity of the >>>> advisory, I'm genuinely curious about this. I can't think of a = scenario >>>> were someone could attack /dev/random using this vector without 1 = or 2 >>>> above also being true. >>>=20 >>>=20 >>> Say you have a physical tap on the network upstream from the victim. = The >>> victim is exchanging data across a VPN. You can capture the = encrypted >>> traffic, and knowing there is a weakness in the quality of RNG, more >>> easily decode the encrypted traffic. You dont have to worry about >>> sending "extra" traffic from the host say, by poking around in = /dev/mem >>> etc. >>=20 >>=20 >> Yes, that's an obvious consequence of a compromised RNG; but that's = not what >> I was asking. I'm asking how the attacker could compromise the = hardware RNG >> without also obtaining effectively unfettered access to the entire = system. >=20 > By compromising it at the design stage. For example, the NSA could > hypothetically collaborate with Intel to trojan Intel's RNG. In that > case, the NSA would've compromised the RNG, but they wouldn't have > unfettered access to the rest of the system. Also this: http://people.umass.edu/gbecker/BeckerChes13.pdf "In this paper, we will therefore focus on Trojans inserted into designs at the layout level, after the place & route phase. [..] By using two = case studies, a side-channel resistant SBox implementation and an = implementation of a secure digital random number post-processing design derived from = Intel's new RNG used in the Ivy Bridge processors, we prove that the proposed dopant-based Trojans can be used e=0Eciently in practice to compromise the security". Might not apply to Intel, since it has its own fabs, but e.g. AMD = doesn't. --=20 If you cut off my head, what would I say? Me and my head, or me and my = body?
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?E7EB3D19-13E6-481D-B724-0DFF10FFBBCF>