linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/5] random: fix crng

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: <4393662.RPWnPK42dp@tauon.chronox.de>
Date:   Fri, 13 Apr 2018 15:05:01 +0200
From:   Stephan Mueller <smueller@...onox.de>
To:     "Theodore Y. Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>
Cc:     linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org,
        Linux Kernel Developers List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] random: fix crng_ready() test

Am Freitag, 13. April 2018, 14:53:13 CEST schrieb Theodore Y. Ts'o:

Hi Theodore,
> 
> This was always the original design intent, but I screwed up and no
> one noticed until Jann reached out to be and said, "Hey.... this
> doesn't seem to make much sense".

I disagree, but I guess you would have expected that. But this is not the 
issue.

What I would like to point out that more and more folks change to 
getrandom(2). As this call will now unblock much later in the boot cycle, 
these systems see a significant departure from the current system behavior.

E.g. an sshd using getrandom(2) would be ready shortly after the boot finishes 
as of now. Now it can be a matter minutes before it responds. Thus, is such 
change in the kernel behavior something for stable?

Ciao
Stephan