[124466] in cryptography@c2.net mail archive
Re: The perils of security tools
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Ben Laurie)
Sun May 25 10:24:03 2008
Date: Sun, 25 May 2008 11:02:32 +0100
From: Ben Laurie <ben@links.org>
To: "Steven M. Bellovin" <smb@cs.columbia.edu>
CC: Eric Young <eay@pobox.com>, Cryptography <cryptography@metzdowd.com>
In-Reply-To: <20080524231843.10a82f1b@cs.columbia.edu>
Steven M. Bellovin wrote:
> 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.
I meant: how good are the PRNGs underneath them?
--
http://www.apache-ssl.org/ben.html http://www.links.org/
"There is no limit to what a man can do or how far he can go if he
doesn't mind who gets the credit." - Robert Woodruff
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The Cryptography Mailing List
Unsubscribe by sending "unsubscribe cryptography" to majordomo@metzdowd.com
