On Wed, 27 Jun 2007, Michael Buesch wrote:
> On Wednesday 27 June 2007 18:40:41 Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> > There *is* a much better way to deal with it, though. Add the fail always
> > RNG device, and always select it by default. Let the user specifically set
> > which RNG he wants, a
On Wednesday 27 June 2007 18:40:41 Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> There *is* a much better way to deal with it, though. Add the fail always
> RNG device, and always select it by default. Let the user specifically set
> which RNG he wants, and it now rates as "trusted", which is the only
> f
Hi Michael!
On Wed, 27 Jun 2007, Michael Buesch wrote:
> On Wednesday 27 June 2007 04:00:46 Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> > On Tue, 26 Jun 2007, Michael Buesch wrote:
> > > On Tuesday 26 June 2007 16:06:25 Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> > > > Which, AFAIK, we can quantify as the mini
On Wednesday 27 June 2007 04:00:46 Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> On Tue, 26 Jun 2007, Michael Buesch wrote:
> > On Tuesday 26 June 2007 16:06:25 Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> > > Which, AFAIK, we can quantify as the minimum expected entropy in the
> > > output.
> >
> > The category
On Wednesday 27 June 2007 05:18:00 Matt Mackall wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 26, 2007 at 04:45:24PM +0200, Michael Buesch wrote:
> > On Tuesday 26 June 2007 16:32:37 Matt Mackall wrote:
> > > > No wait. You are missing the whole point of this
> > > > quality category.
> > > > The whole point of it is to pr
On Tue, Jun 26, 2007 at 04:45:24PM +0200, Michael Buesch wrote:
> On Tuesday 26 June 2007 16:32:37 Matt Mackall wrote:
> > > No wait. You are missing the whole point of this
> > > quality category.
> > > The whole point of it is to prevent defaulting to a bad RNG, if
> > > there's a bad and a good
On Tue, 26 Jun 2007, Michael Buesch wrote:
> On Tuesday 26 June 2007 16:06:25 Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> > Which, AFAIK, we can quantify as the minimum expected entropy in the output.
>
> The category is _not_ a measure of the entropy in the output.
> It is _just_ to get the chance to ge
On Tuesday 26 June 2007 16:32:37 Matt Mackall wrote:
> > No wait. You are missing the whole point of this
> > quality category.
> > The whole point of it is to prevent defaulting to a bad RNG, if
> > there's a bad and a good one in a machine.
> > Well, what's bad.
> > It's easy. HWRNGs like the one
On Tue, Jun 26, 2007 at 04:12:26PM +0200, Michael Buesch wrote:
> On Tuesday 26 June 2007 05:13:41 Matt Mackall wrote:
> > On Sun, Jun 24, 2007 at 03:55:22PM +0200, Michael Buesch wrote:
> > > This adds quality categories for hardware random number generators.
> > >
> > ...
> > > +
> > > +/**
> >
On Tuesday 26 June 2007 16:06:25 Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> Which, AFAIK, we can quantify as the minimum expected entropy in the output.
The category is _not_ a measure of the entropy in the output.
It is _just_ to get the chance to get a sane _default_ policy
for which RNG is enabled by
On Tuesday 26 June 2007 05:13:41 Matt Mackall wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 24, 2007 at 03:55:22PM +0200, Michael Buesch wrote:
> > This adds quality categories for hardware random number generators.
> >
> ...
> > +
> > +/**
> > + * enum hwrng_quality - Quality identifier for RNG hardware
> > + * @HWRNG_QU
On Mon, 25 Jun 2007, Matt Mackall wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 24, 2007 at 03:55:22PM +0200, Michael Buesch wrote:
> > This adds quality categories for hardware random number generators.
> > + * enum hwrng_quality - Quality identifier for RNG hardware
> > + * @HWRNG_QUAL_HIGH: High quality RNG. Highe
On Tuesday 26 June 2007 01:21:56 Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Sun, 24 Jun 2007 15:55:22 +0200
> Michael Buesch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > The qualities of the HWRNGs are different from each other.
> > So the current default policy of the hwrng core to default
> > to the first found RNG is broke
On Sun, Jun 24, 2007 at 03:55:22PM +0200, Michael Buesch wrote:
> This adds quality categories for hardware random number generators.
>
...
> +
> +/**
> + * enum hwrng_quality - Quality identifier for RNG hardware
> + * @HWRNG_QUAL_HIGH: High quality RNG. Higher quality than
> + *
On Sun, 24 Jun 2007 15:55:22 +0200
Michael Buesch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The qualities of the HWRNGs are different from each other.
> So the current default policy of the hwrng core to default
> to the first found RNG is broken. This changes the default
> policy to select the RNG with the be
On Sunday 24 June 2007 16:30:59 Alexey Dobriyan wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 24, 2007 at 03:55:22PM +0200, Michael Buesch wrote:
> > This adds quality categories for hardware random number generators.
>
> > +static const char * hwrng_quality_string(enum hwrng_quality qual)
> > +{
> > + switch (qual) {
>
On Sun, Jun 24, 2007 at 03:55:22PM +0200, Michael Buesch wrote:
> This adds quality categories for hardware random number generators.
> +static const char * hwrng_quality_string(enum hwrng_quality qual)
> +{
> + switch (qual) {
> + case HWRNG_QUAL_HIGH:
> + return "high";
> +
17 matches
Mail list logo
