[lkml]   [2004]   [Sep]   [30]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: mlock(1)
    On Thu, Sep 30, 2004 at 08:54:47PM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:
    > Actually if your cipher is not resistant to known plaintext attack,

    AFIK the only way to make it resistent to a brute force is to make it
    slow, like adding lots of bits of salt.

    > you have other problems anyway. There's a lot of nearly-lnown data
    > (like name of process with pid 1) that single 32bit zero is no problem.

    You could fix that later, by changing the offset randomly before writing
    it to disk.

    My point is very simple, that is if you leave a zero as part of the API,
    then you're making things less secure.
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 14:06    [W:0.042 / U:32.896 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site