> Would people be ok with kernel auto-feeding for /dev/urandom only? I've
quoted text
> been pondering that and I think that would work just as well in practice
>  given the facts above. Then you would still only get blocking
> /dev/random with the user daemon, but that won't matter because all
> the usual users don't rely on thatanyways.

Andi, can you please clarify what you mean by "auto-feeding
/dev/urandom only" and "only get blocking /dev/random with the user
daemon"? Are you suggesting that the kernel provides /dev/urandom and
a userspace daemon (e.g. EGD) provides /dev/random?

Also, if crypto apps like ssh and openssl use on "insecure"
/dev/urandom, then who actually relies on /dev/random? For comparison,
FreeBSD does not even (AFAIK) have /dev/urandom. FreeBSD's /dev/random
is nonblocking (like Linux's /dev/urandom) and includes network
entropy.


chris
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html