Date: Thu, 27 Mar 1997 21:34:43 +0100 From: Gary Howland <gary@systemics.com> To: =?KOI8-R?B?4c7E0sXKIP7F0s7P1w==?= <ache@nagual.ru> Cc: Joerg Wunsch <joerg_wunsch@uriah.heep.sax.de>, markm@freebsd.org, security@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ATTENTION: Initial state of random pool Message-ID: <199703272034.VAA13075@internal-mail.systemics.com> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 27 Mar 1997 22:17:56 %2B0300." <Pine.BSF.3.96.970327220407.872A-100000@nagual.ru>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> Recent Joerg report about fortune behaviour make me think about initial > state of /dev/random, i.e. what happens when rndcontrol not called > at all and no keys pressed (or the same key sequence, because it > relays on scancode)? I fear that pool state is very predicted in this > case. If I right, we need to do something to have true random in the > pool even without rndcontrol tool (it called even after daemons > started, so daemons can't use its advantages in any case!). I.e. add some > timer randomness at the kernel boot state > and allows rndcontrol-style IRQ set in kernel configure file. Ideally it should "throw in some randomness" from the previous session, and not rely solely on the time. For instance, if a block of data could be "added" to the device at boot time, then it could still be useful for daemons. After booting is complete, then a new block of data could be generated for the next reboot. Comments? Gary
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199703272034.VAA13075>