Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Wed, 15 May 1996 15:40:00 -0400 (EDT) | From | Kevin M Bealer <> | Subject | Re: CONFIG_RANDOM option for 1.99.2 |
| |
On Tue, 14 May 1996, Martin.Dalecki wrote:
> > > On Mon, 13 May 1996, Theodore Ts'o wrote: > > > The original reason I didn't provide a CONFIG_RANDOM was because I > > wanted security-oriented applications (i.e., Netscape, PGP, Kerberos, > > etc.) to be able to assume that if they were on Linux, /dev/linux would > > always be present. Good, secure numbers are absolutely vital for > > Do You really think that they will be aware of such an Linux *SPECIFIC* > animal? > > > The random driver also isn't all that big, and the overhead of the > > add_XXX_randomness() calls were designed to be as small as possible. > > That's compleatly wrong!! It is now about 16KBytes. More than the floppy > driver, more that the ide driver, more than the CD-ROM drivers.... > This is compleatly inacceptable for such an arcane FEATURE like this > (IMHO). > > Marcin
The IDE/scsi/floppy controllers are transparent and handle hardware. No program depends on scsi or ide specifically. /dev/random and /dev/urandom are system services; they're not really comparable.
BTW, are they really specific to linux?
__kmb203@psu.edu_________________________Debian__1.1___Linux__1.99.3___ The greatest dangers to liberty lurk in insidious encroachment by men of zeal, well-meaning but without understanding. -- Justice Louis D. Brandeis
|  |