Stanimir Varbanov wrote:
> I ran the rngtest with following command line:
>
> # cat /dev/hw_random | rngtest -c 10
> ...
> rngtest: bits received from input: 200032
> rngtest: FIPS 140-2 successes: 99925
> rngtest: FIPS 140-2 failures: 75
> ...
>
> Could you guys comment those results?
Stanimir Varbanov wrote:
I ran the rngtest with following command line:
# cat /dev/hw_random | rngtest -c 10
...
rngtest: bits received from input: 200032
rngtest: FIPS 140-2 successes: 99925
rngtest: FIPS 140-2 failures: 75
...
Could you guys comment those results?
These tests
On 10/10/2013 03:41 AM, Paul Mackerras wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 09, 2013 at 08:07:35AM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>
>> consider the PowerPC random number generator[1]) and
>
> [snip]
>
>> [1] which has a known first-order bias which they "correct" for by
>> XORing two datums together in a very
Hi Ted, Peter,
On 10/09/2013 06:07 PM, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> On 10/09/2013 07:46 AM, Stanimir Varbanov wrote:
>>
>> No, there is no public documentation for the block. Here is the driver
>> documentation which I used as a base [1].
>>
>> My guess was that - if it is PRNG (got from hardware
On Wed, Oct 09, 2013 at 08:07:35AM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> consider the PowerPC random number generator[1]) and
[snip]
> [1] which has a known first-order bias which they "correct" for by
> XORing two datums together in a very simple data reduction step.
65 actually, not two.
>
H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> On 10/09/2013 09:03 AM, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
>> You can specify as a command-line argument (-H) to rngd the entropy
>> per bit of input data.
>
> There is no -H option in upstream rngd. It might be in the Debian fork,
> but the Debian fork has serious other problems.
What
H. Peter Anvin wrote:
On 10/09/2013 09:03 AM, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
You can specify as a command-line argument (-H) to rngd the entropy
per bit of input data.
There is no -H option in upstream rngd. It might be in the Debian fork,
but the Debian fork has serious other problems.
What
On Wed, Oct 09, 2013 at 08:07:35AM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
consider the PowerPC random number generator[1]) and
[snip]
[1] which has a known first-order bias which they correct for by
XORing two datums together in a very simple data reduction step.
65 actually, not two.
However, if
Hi Ted, Peter,
On 10/09/2013 06:07 PM, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
On 10/09/2013 07:46 AM, Stanimir Varbanov wrote:
No, there is no public documentation for the block. Here is the driver
documentation which I used as a base [1].
My guess was that - if it is PRNG (got from hardware description
On 10/10/2013 03:41 AM, Paul Mackerras wrote:
On Wed, Oct 09, 2013 at 08:07:35AM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
consider the PowerPC random number generator[1]) and
[snip]
[1] which has a known first-order bias which they correct for by
XORing two datums together in a very simple data
On 10/09/2013 09:03 AM, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 09, 2013 at 08:07:35AM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>> There needs to be an architecturally guaranteed lower bound on the
>> entropic content for this to be at all useful. However, the hwrandom
>> interface is currently expecting fully
On Wed, Oct 09, 2013 at 08:07:35AM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> There needs to be an architecturally guaranteed lower bound on the
> entropic content for this to be at all useful. However, the hwrandom
> interface is currently expecting fully entropic output (which is almost
> certainly
On 10/09/2013 07:46 AM, Stanimir Varbanov wrote:
>
> No, there is no public documentation for the block. Here is the driver
> documentation which I used as a base [1].
>
> My guess was that - if it is PRNG (got from hardware description link
> above) than according to wiki [2] it is also known
Hi Ted,
On 10/04/2013 09:10 PM, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 04, 2013 at 07:23:50PM +0300, Stanimir Varbanov wrote:
>> I guess that it should follow NIST 800-90 recommendation, but I'm not
>> aware what DRBG mechanism is used.
>>
>> To be honest I really don't know the hardware
Hi Ted,
On 10/04/2013 09:10 PM, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
On Fri, Oct 04, 2013 at 07:23:50PM +0300, Stanimir Varbanov wrote:
I guess that it should follow NIST 800-90 recommendation, but I'm not
aware what DRBG mechanism is used.
To be honest I really don't know the hardware implementation
On 10/09/2013 07:46 AM, Stanimir Varbanov wrote:
No, there is no public documentation for the block. Here is the driver
documentation which I used as a base [1].
My guess was that - if it is PRNG (got from hardware description link
above) than according to wiki [2] it is also known as a
On Wed, Oct 09, 2013 at 08:07:35AM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
There needs to be an architecturally guaranteed lower bound on the
entropic content for this to be at all useful. However, the hwrandom
interface is currently expecting fully entropic output (which is almost
certainly bogus...
On 10/09/2013 09:03 AM, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
On Wed, Oct 09, 2013 at 08:07:35AM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
There needs to be an architecturally guaranteed lower bound on the
entropic content for this to be at all useful. However, the hwrandom
interface is currently expecting fully entropic
On Fri, Oct 04, 2013 at 07:23:50PM +0300, Stanimir Varbanov wrote:
> I guess that it should follow NIST 800-90 recommendation, but I'm not
> aware what DRBG mechanism is used.
>
> To be honest I really don't know the hardware implementation details. I
> put PRNG abbreviation in the cover letter
Hi Ted,
On 10/03/2013 07:51 PM, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 03, 2013 at 05:52:33PM +0300, Stanimir Varbanov wrote:
>> This patch set adds hardware RNG driver wich is used to control the
>> Qualcomm's PRNG hardware block.
>> The first patch document the DT bindings needed to sucessfuly
Hi Ted,
On 10/03/2013 07:51 PM, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
On Thu, Oct 03, 2013 at 05:52:33PM +0300, Stanimir Varbanov wrote:
This patch set adds hardware RNG driver wich is used to control the
Qualcomm's PRNG hardware block.
The first patch document the DT bindings needed to sucessfuly probe
the
On Fri, Oct 04, 2013 at 07:23:50PM +0300, Stanimir Varbanov wrote:
I guess that it should follow NIST 800-90 recommendation, but I'm not
aware what DRBG mechanism is used.
To be honest I really don't know the hardware implementation details. I
put PRNG abbreviation in the cover letter just
On Thu, Oct 03, 2013 at 05:52:33PM +0300, Stanimir Varbanov wrote:
> This patch set adds hardware RNG driver wich is used to control the
> Qualcomm's PRNG hardware block.
> The first patch document the DT bindings needed to sucessfuly probe
> the driver and the second patch adds the driver.
Is
This patch set adds hardware RNG driver wich is used to control the
Qualcomm's PRNG hardware block.
The first patch document the DT bindings needed to sucessfuly probe
the driver and the second patch adds the driver.
Comments are welecome!
Stanimir Varbanov (2):
ARM: DT: msm: Add Qualcomm's
This patch set adds hardware RNG driver wich is used to control the
Qualcomm's PRNG hardware block.
The first patch document the DT bindings needed to sucessfuly probe
the driver and the second patch adds the driver.
Comments are welecome!
Stanimir Varbanov (2):
ARM: DT: msm: Add Qualcomm's
On Thu, Oct 03, 2013 at 05:52:33PM +0300, Stanimir Varbanov wrote:
This patch set adds hardware RNG driver wich is used to control the
Qualcomm's PRNG hardware block.
The first patch document the DT bindings needed to sucessfuly probe
the driver and the second patch adds the driver.
Is this
26 matches
Mail list logo
