On Wed, Mar 26, 2014 at 9:47 PM, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> On 03/26/2014 06:11 PM, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>>
>> TBH I'm highly skeptical of this kind of entropy estimation.
>> /dev/random is IMO just silly, since you need to have very
>> conservative entropy estimates for the concept to really work,
On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 7:54 AM, Torsten Duwe wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 26, 2014 at 06:03:37PM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>> I'm wondering more about the default. We default to 50% for
>> arch_get_random_seed, and this is supposed to be the default for in effect
>> unverified hwrngs...
>
> If the
On Wed, Mar 26, 2014 at 09:47:31PM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> On 03/26/2014 06:11 PM, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> > Also, in the /dev/random sense,
> > most hardware RNGs have no entropy at all, since they're likely to be
> > FIPS-approved DRBGs that don't have a real non-deterministic source.
>
On Wed, Mar 26, 2014 at 06:03:37PM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> I'm wondering more about the default. We default to 50% for
> arch_get_random_seed, and this is supposed to be the default for in effect
> unverified hwrngs...
If the default were 0, it would be exactly the old behaviour.
How abo
On 03/26/2014 06:11 PM, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>
> TBH I'm highly skeptical of this kind of entropy estimation.
> /dev/random is IMO just silly, since you need to have very
> conservative entropy estimates for the concept to really work, and
> that ends up being hideously slow.
In the absence of
There are a number of things wrong with this post, but I'll respond in detail
when I get to a keyboard.
On March 26, 2014 6:11:53 PM PDT, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>[cc: Greg Price, might be working on this stuff]
>
>On Wed, Mar 26, 2014 at 6:03 PM, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>> I'm wondering more abou
[cc: Greg Price, might be working on this stuff]
On Wed, Mar 26, 2014 at 6:03 PM, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> I'm wondering more about the default. We default to 50% for
> arch_get_random_seed, and this is supposed to be the default for in effect
> unverified hwrngs...
TBH I'm highly skeptical of
I'm wondering more about the default. We default to 50% for
arch_get_random_seed, and this is supposed to be the default for in effect
unverified hwrngs...
On March 26, 2014 5:50:09 PM PDT, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>On 03/21/2014 07:33 AM, Torsten Duwe wrote:
>> This can be viewed as the in-kern
On 03/21/2014 07:33 AM, Torsten Duwe wrote:
> This can be viewed as the in-kernel equivalent of hwrngd;
> like FUSE it is a good thing to have a mechanism in user land,
> but for some reasons (simplicity, secrecy, integrity, speed)
> it may be better to have it in kernel space.
Nice.
[...]
>
This can be viewed as the in-kernel equivalent of hwrngd;
like FUSE it is a good thing to have a mechanism in user land,
but for some reasons (simplicity, secrecy, integrity, speed)
it may be better to have it in kernel space.
This patch creates a thread once a hwrng registers, and uses
the previo
10 matches
Mail list logo
