Date: Fri, 14 Sep 2012 22:18:35 -0400 From: Samuel Ports <emu@emu.so> To: RW <rwmaillists@googlemail.com> Cc: Arthur Mesh <arthurmesh@gmail.com>, Lepore <freebsd@damnhippie.dyndns.org>, Doug Barton <dougb@freebsd.org>, "Ian@freebsd.org" <Ian@freebsd.org>, Ben Laurie <benl@freebsd.org>, "freebsd-security@freebsd.org" <freebsd-security@freebsd.org>, "Bjoern A. Zeeb" <bz@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: svn commit: r239569 - head/etc/rc.d Message-ID: <-5330022830022085986@unknownmsgid> In-Reply-To: <20120915010713.492c65a0@gumby.homeunix.com> References: <50453686.9090100@FreeBSD.org> <20120911082309.GD72584@dragon.NUXI.org> <504F0687.7020309@FreeBSD.org> <201209121628.18088.jhb@freebsd.org> <5050F477.8060409@FreeBSD.org> <20120912213141.GI14077@x96.org> <20120913052431.GA15052@dragon.NUXI.org> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1209131258210.13080@ai.fobar.qr> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1209141336170.13080@ai.fobar.qr> <CAG5KPzyngKFNMoPKmfKg%2BQLkGPj0oMX8YYp0qQNHgKTSH4afHQ@mail.gmail.com> <20120914154617.39025ac0@gumby.homeunix.com> <CAG5KPzyHkR_n8O38gqx8mLFykhur4BORWmG17BVpx9Hruktfig@mail.gmail.com> <20120915010713.492c65a0@gumby.homeunix.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Omg cant an freebsd-entropy be created as mailing list already Sent from my iPhone On Sep 14, 2012, at 8:09 PM, RW <rwmaillists@googlemail.com> wrote: > On Fri, 14 Sep 2012 17:25:59 +0100 > Ben Laurie wrote: > >> On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 3:46 PM, RW <rwmaillists@googlemail.com> >> wrote: >>> On Fri, 14 Sep 2012 14:43:53 +0100 >>> Ben Laurie wrote: >>> >>>> On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 2:38 PM, Bjoern A. Zeeb <bz@freebsd.org> >>>> wrote: >>>>> 7) send all data to the kernel and hash (arch dependent?) it + >>>>> counter value into the buffer on overflow, as in b[n] = H(b[n] + >>>>> c >>>>> + i[n]) in the kernel >>>>> (can control when buffer full and only then take action when >>>>> needed, indepedent on how seed data is chosen, uses standard >>>>> technology) >>>> >>>> IMO, this is the only good option. >>> >>> No it isn't. I means that the hashing is unconditional, so anyone >>> that needs a faster boot needs to patch the kernel. >> >> Has anyone measured the cost of doing this? Also, if you really want >> to turn it off, we could provide a flag. > > Yes, read the thread. > >>> It has no advantage >>> whatsoever over a minor change to initrandom. >> >> It absolutely has. It applies to all inputs to /dev/random, not just >> those that come from initrandom. > > If the rc script are written correctly it shouldn't matter, there no > need to write to /dev/random after the boot - it wont do anything > useful. > > It has no advantage over hashing the low-grade entropy in userland > which is is just couple of lines difference in a shell script. > >> Also, should something get to write >> to it before initrandom, initrandom's input would still be used. > > There's no reason to do that, so why do you think it matter? > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-security@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-security > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-security-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?-5330022830022085986>