David Jaša <djasa@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > BTW when looking at an old BSI's issue with Linux urandom that Jarod > Wilson tried to solve with this series: > https://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-crypto/msg06113.html > I was thinking: > 1) wouldn't it help for large urandom consumers if kernel created a DRBG > instance for each of them? It would likely enhance performance and solve > BSI's concern of predicting what numbers could other urandom consumers > obtain at cost of memory footprint > and then, after reading paper associated with this series: > 2) did you evaluate use of intermediate DRBG fed by primary generator to > instantiate per-node DRBG's? It would allow initialization of all > secondary DRBGs right after primary generator initialization. Theodore Ts'o, the random maintainer, already has a patch that seems to deal with this issue. He has posted more than one version & I'm not sure this is the best or latest, but ... https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/5/30/22 -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-crypto" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
