linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH v1 00/52] Audit kernel random number use

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: <20200329214214.GB768293@mit.edu>
Date:   Sun, 29 Mar 2020 17:42:14 -0400
From:   "Theodore Y. Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>
To:     George Spelvin <lkml@....ORG>
Cc:     David Laight <David.Laight@...LAB.COM>,
        Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Qian Cai <cai@....pw>, Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
        Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Linux MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v1 00/52] Audit kernel random number use

On Sun, Mar 29, 2020 at 05:41:22PM +0000, George Spelvin wrote:
> > Using xor was particularly stupid.
> > The whole generator was then linear and trivially reversable.
> > Just using addition would have made it much stronger.
> 
> I considered changing it to addition (actually, add pairs and XOR the 
> sums), but that would break its self-test.  And once I'd done that,
> there are much better possibilities.
> 
> Actually, addition doesn't make it *much* stronger.  To start
> with, addition and xor are the same thing at the lsbit, so
> observing 113 lsbits gives you a linear decoding problem.

David,

If anyone is trying to rely on prandom_u32() as being "strong" in any
sense of the word in terms of being reversable by attacker --- they
shouldn't be using prandom_u32().  That's going to be true no matter
*what* algorithm we use.

Better distribution?  Sure.  Making prandom_u32() faster?  Absolutely;
that's its primary Raison d'Etre.

George,

Did you send the full set of patches to a single mailing list?  Or can
you make it available on a git tree somewhere?  I've y seen this
message plus the ext4 related change, and I can't find the full patch
series anywhere.  If you can send the next version such that it's
fully cc'ed to linux-kernel, that would be really helpful.

Thanks!!

						- Ted