Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2000 10:40:59 +0200 From: Mark Murray <mark@grondar.za> To: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@critter.freebsd.dk> Cc: Mark Murray <mark@grondar.za>, "Andrey A. Chernov" <ache@FreeBSD.ORG>, current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: randomdev entropy gathering is really weak Message-ID: <200007170841.KAA00459@grimreaper.grondar.za> In-Reply-To: <672.963815058@critter.freebsd.dk> ; from Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@critter.freebsd.dk> "Mon, 17 Jul 2000 08:24:18 %2B0200." References: <672.963815058@critter.freebsd.dk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> In message <200007170607.IAA05866@grimreaper.grondar.za>, Mark Murray writes: > > >getnanotime() is already extensively used; > > I looked at that use, but as far as I can tell, it is only used as a > flag at this time, the bits returned by getnanotime() does not end up > in the entropy pool ? Not true; struct entropy contains nanotime and the harvested entropy; _both_ are hashed in the reseed operation. > I'm not dissatisfied about that btw, the output from getnanotime() > is not very random at all, unless you dive into the timecounter > code to find out what the parameters are. I agree that it is not (very) random; however cclock jitter and keystroke timing can help thwart the bad guys... 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
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200007170841.KAA00459>