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]
Date:	Tue, 30 Oct 2012 20:12:39 +0900
From:	Akinobu Mita <akinobu.mita@...il.com>
To:	"Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>,
	Akinobu Mita <akinobu.mita@...il.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	Artem Bityutskiy <dedekind1@...il.com>,
	Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>,
	David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>,
	linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/9] random32: introduce random32_get_bytes() and prandom32_get_bytes()

2012/10/30 Akinobu Mita <akinobu.mita@...il.com>:
> 2012/10/30 Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>:
>> On Sun, Oct 28, 2012 at 04:18:58PM +0900, Akinobu Mita wrote:
>>>  /**
>>> + *   prandom32_get_bytes - get the requested number of pseudo-random bytes
>>> + *   @state: pointer to state structure holding seeded state.
>>> + *   @buf: where to copy the pseudo-random bytes to
>>> + *   @bytes: the requested number of bytes
>>> + *
>>> + *   This is used for pseudo-randomness with no outside seeding.
>>> + *   For more random results, use random32_get_bytes().
>>> + */
>>> +
>>> +/**
>>> + *   random32_get_bytes - get the requested number of pseudo-random bytes
>>> + *   @buf: where to copy the pseudo-random bytes to
>>> + *   @bytes: the requested number of bytes
>>> + */
>>
>> This naming scheme is going to be very confusing.  If the function is
>> going to return a pseudo-random number, it *must* have a "prandom"
>> suffix.  Otherwise some kernel developer, somewhere, will get confused
>> between get_random_bytes() and random32_get_bytes(), and the result
>> may be a very embarassing security exposure.
>>
>> How about prandom32_get_bytes_state() and prandom32_get_bytes() instead?
>
> I agree with your suggestion.  I'll rename them and try again.
>
> By the way, should we also rename the existing random32() and
> prandom32() in the future?
>
> Specifically, rename random32() to prandom32(), and prandom32() to
> prandom32_state().  As a result, it will cause a little confusion
> between old and new prandom32(). But the number of arguments will
> be changed from 3 to 2, so gcc can detect the misuse of prandom32().

Oops, I intended to say "the number of arguments of prandom32() will be
changed from 1 to 0". And I realized that the exisiting srandom32() also should
be renamed to sprandom32().
--
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/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ