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  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:	Thu, 17 Jul 2014 14:37:34 -0700
From:	Andy Lutomirski <>
To:	"Theodore Ts'o" <>,
	Andy Lutomirski <>,
	Mark Kettenis <>,
	"" <>,,
Subject: Re: [PATCH, RFC] random: introduce getrandom(2) system call

On Thu, Jul 17, 2014 at 2:28 PM, Theodore Ts'o <> wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 17, 2014 at 01:35:15PM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>> Can we please have a mode in which getrandom(2) can neither block nor
>> fail?  If that gets added, then this can replace things like AT_RANDOM.
> AT_RANDOM has been around for a long time; it's not something we can
> remove.

I'm not suggesting removing AT_RANDOM.  To the contrary, I'm
suggesting that libraries that need to seed some kind of
non-cryptographic, non-security-related RNG could use getrandom(2)
with appropriate flags rather than screwing around with getpid,
clock_gettime, etc.

For example:

unsigned int seed;
getrandom(&seed, sizeof(seed), GRND_BEST_EFFORT); /* Never fails on
new enough kernels */

No error checking, no weird cases, and if the RNG isn't well seeded,
then I tried my best.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists