Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 7 Sep 1999 12:30:03 -0500 | From | kernel@draper ... | Subject | Re: loop.c transfer module api |
| |
On Tue, Sep 07, 1999 at 06:08:20PM +0200, Alexander S A Kjeldaas wrote: > > > > You do not consider a hash of the device/file name to be sufficiently > > random? > > Sorry I was referring to your loop_rand which was keeping IVs secret. > I'm not sure a hash of device/file is sufficiently random, but if that > is introduced you still get a dependency on the location/name of the > backing store. However, if #2 is implemented, people can do whatever > they want. I think _I_ would prefer something like the following in a > nice wrapping: > > # dd if=/dev/urandom of=backingfile bs=32 count=1 > # IV=`dd if=backingfile bs=32 count=1 | od -tx -w32 | ...` > # losetup -e serpent -o 512 -iv $IV /dev/loop0 backingfile >
By golly, that looks good to me too. Lets run with that. Externalized IV specification allows existing loopcrypto filesystems with _either_ absolute or relative block IV seeds can continue to live unchanged... a nice bonus.
Is this something that you would expect to implement soon? If not, I'll get busy implementing yet another "not for export" (grrrr) version for USA use until equivalent kerneli patches become available.
Reed,
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |