Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH RFC v4 1/1] random: WARN on large getrandom() waits and introduce getrandom2() | From | "Alexander E. Patrakov" <> | Date | Sat, 21 Sep 2019 01:11:57 +0500 |
| |
21.09.2019 00:51, Linus Torvalds пишет:
> And we'll also have to make getrandom(0) be really _timely_. Security > people would likely rather wait for minutes before they are happy with > it. But because it's a boot constraint as things are now, it will not > just be jitter-entropy, it will be _accelerated_ jitter-entropy in 15 > seconds or whatever, and since it can't use up all of CPU time, it's > realistically more like "15 second timeout, but less of actual CPU > time for jitter".
I don't think that "accelerated jitter" makes sense. The jitterentropy hwrng that I sent earlier fills the entropy buffer in less than 2 seconds, even with quality=4, so there is no need to accelerate it even more.
> That said, if we can all convince everybody (hah!) that jitter entropy > in the kernel would be sufficient, then we can make the whole point > entirely moot, and just say "we'll just change crng_wait() to do > jitter entropy instead and be done with it. Then any getrandom() user > will just basically wait for a (very limited) time and the system will > be happy. > > If that is the case we wouldn't need new flags at all. But I don't > think you can make everybody agree to that, which is why I suspect > we'll need the new flag, and I'll just take the heat for saying "0 is > now off limits, because it does this thing that a lot of people > dislike".
I 100% agree with that.
-- Alexander E. Patrakov
[unhandled content-type:application/pkcs7-signature] | |