From owner-freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG  Fri Sep 14 16:26:00 2012
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-security@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7A38F106566B;
	Fri, 14 Sep 2012 16:26:00 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from benlaurie@gmail.com)
Received: from mail-vb0-f54.google.com (mail-vb0-f54.google.com
	[209.85.212.54])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BF9D48FC14;
	Fri, 14 Sep 2012 16:25:59 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by vbmv11 with SMTP id v11so6478817vbm.13
	for <multiple recipients>; Fri, 14 Sep 2012 09:25:59 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
	h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date
	:x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type;
	bh=aywV/VuI6GqDfDQpiZHZ/wQJ91l/dssGHzNLsaoYF1c=;
	b=eCICY7QOzCqEGNJKwn1OaPlhTY7Ndg6BAL+Z6qT51sSn82BiZGg1n8lbF1pfKKRdtF
	cT/I0tKh2l6+19Iw448hjbjrTwtgM4BGpXojOFMU8XL6EvyL/CGZ/tQweevLPBOY7V14
	kb1bvkjKTGSTkgalim7HbXhi9E+D+F1urFKqkGw4z6x5OlBh2nYzzjF23vsW/wAypBM0
	7vvszg4N0DXJ4og+LP/rB4lrKs+IHW61+o3zoUYZ1gEKOJbXzqX9o7E/sBPybhyk7C6c
	TizActuqow2Wmu005TZiWwBcVvZqk8sKp1tR2HptOJnhY2Nryqa41XN7zECoveQF75ed
	e6Jg==
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.59.7.68 with SMTP id da4mr2869166ved.4.1347639959190; Fri, 14
	Sep 2012 09:25:59 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: benlaurie@gmail.com
Received: by 10.58.79.243 with HTTP; Fri, 14 Sep 2012 09:25:59 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <20120914154617.39025ac0@gumby.homeunix.com>
References: <50453686.9090100@FreeBSD.org>
	<20120911082309.GD72584@dragon.NUXI.org>
	<504F0687.7020309@FreeBSD.org> <201209121628.18088.jhb@freebsd.org>
	<5050F477.8060409@FreeBSD.org> <20120912213141.GI14077@x96.org>
	<20120913052431.GA15052@dragon.NUXI.org>
	<alpine.BSF.2.00.1209131258210.13080@ai.fobar.qr>
	<alpine.BSF.2.00.1209141336170.13080@ai.fobar.qr>
	<CAG5KPzyngKFNMoPKmfKg+QLkGPj0oMX8YYp0qQNHgKTSH4afHQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<20120914154617.39025ac0@gumby.homeunix.com>
Date: Fri, 14 Sep 2012 17:25:59 +0100
X-Google-Sender-Auth: 30ayUiS8iu7OJbulj1rZ7B4dx2A
Message-ID: <CAG5KPzyHkR_n8O38gqx8mLFykhur4BORWmG17BVpx9Hruktfig@mail.gmail.com>
From: Ben Laurie <benl@freebsd.org>
To: RW <rwmaillists@googlemail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Cc: Arthur Mesh <arthurmesh@gmail.com>,
	Ian Lepore <freebsd@damnhippie.dyndns.org>,
	Doug Barton <dougb@freebsd.org>, freebsd-security@freebsd.org,
	"Bjoern A. Zeeb" <bz@freebsd.org>
Subject: Re: svn commit: r239569 - head/etc/rc.d
X-BeenThere: freebsd-security@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Security issues \[members-only posting\]"
	<freebsd-security.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-security>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-security-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-security>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-security@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-security-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-security>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-security-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 14 Sep 2012 16:26:00 -0000

On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 3:46 PM, RW <rwmaillists@googlemail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 14 Sep 2012 14:43:53 +0100
> Ben Laurie wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 2:38 PM, Bjoern A. Zeeb <bz@freebsd.org>
>> wrote:
>> > 7) send all data to the kernel and hash (arch dependent?) it +
>> > counter value into the buffer on overflow, as in b[n] = H(b[n] + c
>> > + i[n]) in the kernel
>> >    (can control when buffer full and only then take action when
>> >    needed, indepedent on how seed data is chosen, uses standard
>> >    technology)
>>
>> IMO, this is the only good option.
>
> No it isn't. I means that the hashing is unconditional, so anyone that
> needs a faster boot needs to patch the kernel.

Has anyone measured the cost of doing this? Also, if you really want
to turn it off, we could provide a flag.

>  It has no advantage
> whatsoever over a minor change to initrandom.

It absolutely has. It applies to all inputs to /dev/random, not just
those that come from initrandom. Also, should something get to write
to it before initrandom, initrandom's input would still be used.