Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 14 Sep 2012 22:18:35 -0400
From:      Samuel Ports <emu@emu.so>
To:        RW <rwmaillists@googlemail.com>
Cc:        Arthur Mesh <arthurmesh@gmail.com>, Lepore <freebsd@damnhippie.dyndns.org>, Doug Barton <dougb@freebsd.org>, "Ian@freebsd.org" <Ian@freebsd.org>, Ben Laurie <benl@freebsd.org>, "freebsd-security@freebsd.org" <freebsd-security@freebsd.org>, "Bjoern A. Zeeb" <bz@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: svn commit: r239569 - head/etc/rc.d
Message-ID:  <-5330022830022085986@unknownmsgid>
In-Reply-To: <20120915010713.492c65a0@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> <CAG5KPzyHkR_n8O38gqx8mLFykhur4BORWmG17BVpx9Hruktfig@mail.gmail.com> <20120915010713.492c65a0@gumby.homeunix.com>

Next in thread | Previous in thread | Raw E-Mail | Index | Archive | Help
Omg cant an freebsd-entropy be created as mailing list already

Sent from my iPhone

On Sep 14, 2012, at 8:09 PM, RW <rwmaillists@googlemail.com> wrote:

> On Fri, 14 Sep 2012 17:25:59 +0100
> Ben Laurie wrote:
>
>> 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.
>
> Yes, read the thread.
>
>>> 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.
>
> If the rc script are written correctly it shouldn't matter, there no
> need to write to /dev/random after the boot - it wont do anything
> useful.
>
> It has no advantage over hashing the low-grade entropy in userland
> which is is just couple of lines difference in a shell script.
>
>> Also, should something get to write
>> to it before initrandom, initrandom's input would still be used.
>
> There's no reason to do that, so why do you think it matter?
> _______________________________________________
> freebsd-security@freebsd.org mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-security
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-security-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <http://docs.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?-5330022830022085986>