From owner-freebsd-current Sat Jul 22 0:43:44 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from grimreaper.grondar.za (grimreaper.grondar.za [196.7.18.138]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8138337C250; Sat, 22 Jul 2000 00:42:27 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from mark@grondar.za) Received: from grimreaper.grondar.za (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by grimreaper.grondar.za (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id JAA05424; Sat, 22 Jul 2000 09:42:24 +0200 (SAST) (envelope-from mark@grimreaper.grondar.za) Message-Id: <200007220742.JAA05424@grimreaper.grondar.za> To: Kris Kennaway Cc: current@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: randomdev entropy gathering is really weak References: In-Reply-To: ; from Kris Kennaway "Fri, 21 Jul 2000 18:54:54 MST." Date: Sat, 22 Jul 2000 09:42:24 +0200 From: Mark Murray Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > I'm all for storing a sample at shutdown and using it to help seed the > PRNG at startup, but it shouldn't be the only seed used (for example, the > case where the system has never been shut down (cleanly) before and so has > no pre-existing seed file is a BIG corner case to consider since thats how > the system is at the time it first generates SSH keys after a fresh > install). Agreed; we need more entropy sources that are available early enough to be useful. > It might be only an academic vulnerability, but if someone can read your > HD during the time the system is shut down then I'd prefer them not to > know the precise state when the system next starts up again. Yes, if they > can read they can probably also write, but it seems like a mistake when > there's nothing really gained by saving the complete state, as opposed to > an extract. Academic argument noted; with more entropy sources, this situation will improve. M -- Mark Murray Join the anti-SPAM movement: http://www.cauce.org To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message