> Date: Mon, 11 May 2020 12:42:13 -0700 (PDT)
> From: Paul Goyette
>
> Why can't we allow the user to configure/enable estimation on a
> per-source basis? The default can certainly be "disabled", but
> why not override? Just like any other super-user thing, there's
> no reason not to enable sho
> Date: Mon, 11 May 2020 17:56:41 - (UTC)
> From: mlel...@serpens.de (Michael van Elst)
>
> riastr...@netbsd.org (Taylor R Campbell) writes:
>
> >> Date: Mon, 11 May 2020 16:16:12 - (UTC)
> >> From: mlel...@serpens.de (Michael van Elst)
> >>
> >> Now we put all trust in loading a constan
On Mon, 11 May 2020, Michael van Elst wrote:
We only trust a HWRNG and the seed file because only these enter
a non-zero value for entropy. I cannot configure any other source to
do that.
Why can't we allow the user to configure/enable estimation on a
per-source basis? The default can certain
On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 04:16:12PM -, Michael van Elst wrote:
> n...@netbsd.org (nia) writes:
>
> >is insisting). All of that depends on assumptions and trust - it
> >does no measurement of the value of the entropy being provided.
>
> Previously we could trust in random processes, whether the
On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 04:28:51PM +0300, Andreas Gustafsson wrote:
>
> For the OpenBSD strategy to work, the system needs to actually refuse
> to run if the seed can't be loaded (or full entropy achieved in some
> other way). NetBSD doesn't do that. As long as there is any way
Well, no. The s
On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 09:53:31AM +0300, Andreas Gustafsson wrote:
>
> OpenBSD guarantees that there is an entropy seed from the boot loader,
> which is very different from NetBSD's "best effort". Was this not
> already the case when the getentropy API was introduced?
I think you need quotes ar
riastr...@netbsd.org (Taylor R Campbell) writes:
>> Date: Mon, 11 May 2020 16:16:12 - (UTC)
>> From: mlel...@serpens.de (Michael van Elst)
>>
>> Previously we could trust in random processes, whether the entropy
>> estimation was scientific or not. We could also chose what source
>> to trust.
> Date: Mon, 11 May 2020 16:16:12 - (UTC)
> From: mlel...@serpens.de (Michael van Elst)
>
> Previously we could trust in random processes, whether the entropy
> estimation was scientific or not. We could also chose what source
> to trust.
Still can. NetBSD just doesn't do bogus pseudoscienti
n...@netbsd.org (nia) writes:
>is insisting). All of that depends on assumptions and trust - it
>does no measurement of the value of the entropy being provided.
Previously we could trust in random processes, whether the entropy
estimation was scientific or not. We could also chose what source
to
On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 05:58:21PM +0300, Andreas Gustafsson wrote:
> Joerg Sonnenberger wrote:
> > > For the OpenBSD strategy to work, the system needs to actually refuse
> > > to run if the seed can't be loaded (or full entropy achieved in some
> > > other way). NetBSD doesn't do that. As long
On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 04:28:51PM +0300, Andreas Gustafsson wrote:
> For the OpenBSD strategy to work, the system needs to actually refuse
> to run if the seed can't be loaded (or full entropy achieved in some
> other way). NetBSD doesn't do that. As long as there is any way
> userland can start
Joerg Sonnenberger wrote:
> > For the OpenBSD strategy to work, the system needs to actually refuse
> > to run if the seed can't be loaded (or full entropy achieved in some
> > other way). NetBSD doesn't do that. As long as there is any way
> > userland can start before full entropy has been achi
On 11.05.2020 16:19, Joerg Sonnenberger wrote:
> On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 11:38:28AM +0200, Kamil Rytarowski wrote:
>> On 11.05.2020 01:49, Joerg Sonnenberger wrote:
>>> On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 01:11:32AM +0200, Kamil Rytarowski wrote:
On 10.05.2020 18:38, Kamil Rytarowski wrote:
> LLDB wi
On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 11:38:28AM +0200, Kamil Rytarowski wrote:
> On 11.05.2020 01:49, Joerg Sonnenberger wrote:
> > On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 01:11:32AM +0200, Kamil Rytarowski wrote:
> >> On 10.05.2020 18:38, Kamil Rytarowski wrote:
> >>> LLDB will be patched to avoid atomics.
> >> I have checke
On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 04:28:51PM +0300, Andreas Gustafsson wrote:
> nia wrote:
> > > OpenBSD guarantees that there is an entropy seed from the boot loader,
> > > which is very different from NetBSD's "best effort". Was this not
> > > already the case when the getentropy API was introduced?
> >
nia wrote:
> > OpenBSD guarantees that there is an entropy seed from the boot loader,
> > which is very different from NetBSD's "best effort". Was this not
> > already the case when the getentropy API was introduced?
>
> We do the same, on supported architectures. In addition to reading
> from CP
On 11.05.2020 01:49, Joerg Sonnenberger wrote:
> On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 01:11:32AM +0200, Kamil Rytarowski wrote:
>> On 10.05.2020 18:38, Kamil Rytarowski wrote:
>>> LLDB will be patched to avoid atomics.
>> I have checked LLDB and std::atomic is used on purpose and was
>> switched from mutexes 3
On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 09:53:31AM +0300, Andreas Gustafsson wrote:
> OpenBSD guarantees that there is an entropy seed from the boot loader,
> which is very different from NetBSD's "best effort". Was this not
> already the case when the getentropy API was introduced?
We do the same, on supported
18 matches
Mail list logo
