[124465] in cryptography@c2.net mail archive
Re: The perils of security tools
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Steven M. Bellovin)
Sun May 25 10:22:52 2008
Date: Sat, 24 May 2008 23:18:43 -0400
From: "Steven M. Bellovin" <smb@cs.columbia.edu>
To: Ben Laurie <ben@links.org>
Cc: Eric Young <eay@pobox.com>, Cryptography <cryptography@metzdowd.com>
In-Reply-To: <48386CAF.1000904@links.org>
On Sat, 24 May 2008 20:29:51 +0100
Ben Laurie <ben@links.org> wrote:
> Of course, we have now persuaded even the most stubborn OS that
> randomness matters, and most of them make it available, so perhaps
> this concern is moot.
>
> Though I would be interested to know how well they do it! I did have
> some input into the design for FreeBSD's, so I know it isn't
> completely awful, but how do other OSes stack up?
>
I believe that all open source Unix-like systems have /dev/random
and /dev/urandom; Solaris does as well.
--Steve Bellovin, http://www.cs.columbia.edu/~smb
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The Cryptography Mailing List
Unsubscribe by sending "unsubscribe cryptography" to majordomo@metzdowd.com
