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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:	Sun, 10 Feb 2013 20:32:37 +0100
From:	Stephan Mueller <smueller@...onox.de>
To:	Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>, Jeff Epler <jepler@...ythonic.net>,
	linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org, lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] Entropy generator with 100 kB/s throughput

On 10.02.2013 19:50:02, +0100, Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu> wrote:

Hi Ted,
> On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 01:46:18PM +0100, Stephan Mueller wrote:
>> However, the CPU has timing jitter in the execution of instruction. And
>> I try to harvest that jitter. The good thing is that this jitter is
>> always present and can be harvested on demand.
> How do you know, though, that this is what you are harvesting?


...

Given all your doubts on the high-precision timer, how can you
reasonably state that the Linux kernel RNG is good then?

The data from add_timer_randomness the kernel feeds into the input_pool
is a concatenation of the event value, the jiffies and the get_cycles()
value. The events hardly contains any entropy, the jiffies a little bit
due to the coarse resolution of 250 or 1000 Hz. Only the processor
cycles value provides real entropy.

Now you start doubting that with arguments that the resolution of that
processor cycle timer is very coarse. If this is the case, why shall I
trust random.c, especially considering the measurements observable
events like key strokes, mouse movements, interrupts (network cards).
Only if you have a high-precision time stamp, entropy can be derived
from these events.

Moreover, I cannot understand your comments on VMs -- on x86, the timer
depends on the rdtsc instruction which should be available on current
CPUs and is callable from user space. Hence, there should be no obstacle
to use this instruction within a VM and get a good reading.

Note, I will make measurements about the distribution of the timer
values and will come back to you.

Thanks
Stephan

-- 
| Cui bono? |

--
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