> It's not something where if the changes required massive changes, that > I'd necessarily feel the need to backport them to stable. It's a > certificational weakness, but it's a not disaster.
Agreed! It's been there for years, and I'm not too worried. It takes a pretty tight race to cause the problem in the first place. As you note, it only happens with a full pool (already a very secure situation), and the magnitude is limited by the size of entropy additions, which are normally small. I'm just never happy with bugs in security-critical code. "I don't think that bug is exploitable" is almost as ominous a phrase as "Y'all watch this!" -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
