On 09/22/2013 04:23 PM, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 22, 2013 at 03:45:11PM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>> I understand the motivation, but I question basing it in a fixed amount of
>> time.
>
> We already have a threshold based on the amount of the entropy in the
> input pool. I could in
On Sun, Sep 22, 2013 at 03:45:11PM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> I understand the motivation, but I question basing it in a fixed amount of
> time.
We already have a threshold based on the amount of the entropy in the
input pool. I could increase that threshold, but then instead of
having the e
I understand the motivation, but I question basing it in a fixed amount of time.
Theodore Ts'o wrote:
>On Sun, Sep 22, 2013 at 02:21:48PM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>> Is this really an improvement on a system with plenty of entropy?
>Would it not make more sense to modulate this bad on entropy
On Sun, Sep 22, 2013 at 02:21:48PM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> Is this really an improvement on a system with plenty of entropy? Would it
> not make more sense to modulate this bad on entropy production rates?
>
> Also, the urandom pool is only reseeded once per read, no matter how large...
I
Is this really an improvement on a system with plenty of entropy? Would it not
make more sense to modulate this bad on entropy production rates?
Also, the urandom pool is only reseeded once per read, no matter how large...
Theodore Ts'o wrote:
>In order to avoid draining the input pool of its e
In order to avoid draining the input pool of its entropy at too high
of a rate, enforce a minimum time interval between reseedings of the
urandom pool. This is set to 60 seconds by default.
Signed-off-by: "Theodore Ts'o"
---
drivers/char/random.c | 25 +
1 file changed,
6 matches
Mail list logo
