full-disclosure - Attacks based on predictable process IDs??

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <3FC69C19.4070101@hutley.net>
From: brett at hutley.net (Brett Hutley)
Subject: Attacks based on predictable process IDs??

Brett Hutley wrote:

> Folks, does anyone know why predictable process IDs are considered harmful?

Thanks for all the responses. I was analysing the randomness of the 
Windows random number generator - CryptGenRandom() [seems to display a 
high degree of entropy], and I thought I'd look at the randomness of 
Windows PID generation at the same time.

I'm sure there are apps out there that attempt to do crypto while 
seeding their PRNG with a predictable value like the PID. I was just 
wondering what other attack vectors exist for predictable PIDs.

Cheers, Brett

-- 
Brett Hutley [MAppFin,CISSP,SANS GCIH]
mailto:brett@...ley.net
http://hutley.net/brett