From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Mar 3 23:55:29 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EA15016A4CE for ; Thu, 3 Mar 2005 23:55:29 +0000 (GMT) Received: from bcd.geek.com.au (geek.com.au [203.17.37.1]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E40FB43D1F for ; Thu, 3 Mar 2005 23:55:28 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from dan@geek.com.au) Received: by bcd.geek.com.au (Postfix, from userid 106) id DDD2949FA8; Fri, 4 Mar 2005 10:55:25 +1100 (EST) Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2005 10:55:25 +1100 From: Daniel Carosone To: Poul-Henning Kamp Message-ID: <20050303235525.GC8805@bcd.geek.com.au> Mail-Followup-To: Poul-Henning Kamp , "Perry E. Metzger" , ALeine , ticso@cicely.de, elric@imrryr.org, hackers@freebsd.org, tech-security@NetBSD.org References: <87ll94iait.fsf@snark.piermont.com> <12311.1109893353@critter.freebsd.dk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="0lnxQi9hkpPO77W3" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <12311.1109893353@critter.freebsd.dk> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i X-Mailman-Approved-At: Fri, 04 Mar 2005 16:36:07 +0000 cc: ALeine cc: elric@imrryr.org cc: "Perry E. Metzger" cc: hackers@freebsd.org cc: tech-security@NetBSD.org cc: ticso@cicely.de Subject: Re: FUD about CGD and GBDE X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 03 Mar 2005 23:55:30 -0000 --0lnxQi9hkpPO77W3 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 12:42:33AM +0100, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: > The fact that you just need to break one single sector in CGD before > you get the entire disk contents gives a disadvantage to CGD of > 2^26 before we even consider the nature of the attack. That is not > conservative when it could have been trivially avoided. The mechanisms gbde takes to avoid it are far from trivial. -- Dan. --0lnxQi9hkpPO77W3 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (NetBSD) iD8DBQFCJ6PtEAVxvV4N66cRAu2aAJ90wGQvnTXbr8az6JUtat0FRxe3YACfXFPU AmOzn4bCdW/XSkeRhcf21as= =yaj5 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --0lnxQi9hkpPO77W3--