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:   Mon, 18 Sep 2017 11:12:23 +0200
From:   Stephan Mueller <>
Cc:     Greg KH <>,
        "Jason A. Donenfeld" <>,,,,,, Herbert Xu <>,
        Kirill Marinushkin <>,
        Ard Biesheuvel <>,
        Ilhan Gurel <>,,
Subject: Re: [kernel-hardening] Re: [PATCH v4] security/keys: rewrite all of big_key crypto

Am Montag, 18. September 2017, 11:04:55 CEST schrieb Greg KH:

Hi Greg,

> On Mon, Sep 18, 2017 at 10:49:56AM +0200, Stephan Mueller wrote:
> > Am Samstag, 16. September 2017, 15:00:34 CEST schrieb Jason A. Donenfeld:
> > 
> > Hi Jason,
> > 
> > > This started out as just replacing the use of crypto/rng with
> > > get_random_bytes_wait,
> > 
> > This change is a challenge. The use of the kernel crypto API's DRNG has
> > been made to allow FIPS 140-2 compliance. Otherwise, the entire key
> > generation logic will not be using the right(TM) DRNG. Thus, I would not
> > suggest to replace that for a stable tree.
> Why not?

An SP800-90A-compliant DRNG must be used in those circumstances.

> What is the issue here, there is only one "DRNG" in the kernel
> now (and probably for a long time...)

There are more DRNGs implemented in the kernel crypto API (see crypto/drbg.c 
or crypto/ansi-cprng.c).
> > Note, I am currently working on a pluggable DRNG apporach for /dev/random
> > and /dev/urandom to be able to get rid of the use of the kernel crypto
> > API's DRNG API. It is ready and I will air that solution shortly. Yet, it
> > needs work to be integrated upstream (and approval from Ted Tso).
> We don't postpone work for potential future patches that might or might
> not ever happen or get merged.  That's how NetBSD died...

Then I would recommend to leave it as is or hear complaints from other users.


Powered by blists - more mailing lists