linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] random: add blocking facility to urandom

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: <CACXcFmk5M2DeO6RKL2pbmBLsLqvSCaqO5aUaFiU1eYA1fGozhQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Thu, 8 Sep 2011 10:43:38 +0800
From:	Sandy Harris <sandyinchina@...il.com>
To:	Jarod Wilson <jarod@...hat.com>
Cc:	"Ted Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>, Sasha Levin <levinsasha928@...il.com>,
	linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org, Matt Mackall <mpm@...enic.com>,
	Neil Horman <nhorman@...hat.com>,
	Herbert Xu <herbert.xu@...hat.com>,
	Steve Grubb <sgrubb@...hat.com>,
	Stephan Mueller <stephan.mueller@...ec.com>,
	lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] random: add blocking facility to urandom

Jarod Wilson <jarod@...hat.com> wrote:

> Ted Ts'o wrote:

>> Yeah, but there are userspace programs that depend on urandom not
>> blocking... so your proposed change would break them.
>> ...

> But only if you've set the sysctl to a non-zero value, ...
>
> But again, I want to stress that out of the box, there's absolutely no
> change to the way urandom behaves, no blocking, this *only* kicks in if you
> twiddle the sysctl because you have some sort of security requirement that
> mandates it.

So it only breaks things on systems with high security requirements?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/