Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Tue, 29 Oct 2002 12:57:03 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Tue, 29 Oct 2002 12:57:03 -0500 Received: from zcars04e.nortelnetworks.com ([47.129.242.56]:34030 "EHLO zcars04e.nortelnetworks.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Tue, 29 Oct 2002 12:57:02 -0500 Message-ID: <3DBECD3F.2080204@nortelnetworks.com> Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2002 13:02:39 -0500 X-Sybari-Space: 00000000 00000000 00000000 From: Chris Friesen User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:0.9.8) Gecko/20020204 X-Accept-Language: en-us MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Oliver Xymoron Cc: Alexander Viro , linux-kernel Subject: Re: Entropy from disks References: <20021029171011.GD28665@waste.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2028 Lines: 50 Oliver Xymoron wrote: I'm not an expert in this field, so bear with me if I make any blunders obvious to one trained in information theory. > The current Linux PRNG is playing fast and loose here, adding entropy > based on the resolution of the TSC, while the physical turbulence > processes that actually produce entropy are happening at a scale of > seconds. On a GHz processor, if it takes 4 microseconds to return a > disk result from on-disk cache, /dev/random will get a 12-bit credit. In the paper the accuracy of measurement is 1ms. Current hardware has tsc precision of nanoseconds, or about 6 orders of magnitude more accuracy. Doesn't this mean that we can pump in many more bits into the algorithm and get out many more than the 100bits/min that the setup in the paper acheives? > My entropy patches had each entropy source (not just disks) allocate > its own state object, and declare its timing "granularity". Is it that straightforward? In the paper they go through a number of stages designed to remove correlated data. From what I remember of the linux prng disk-related stuff it is not that sophisticated. > There's a further problem with disk timing samples that make them less > than useful in typical headless server use (ie where it matters): the > server does its best to reveal disk latency to clients, easily > measurable within the auto-correlating domain of disk turbulence. If this is truly a concern, what about having a separate disk used for nothing but generating randomness? Chris -- Chris Friesen | MailStop: 043/33/F10 Nortel Networks | work: (613) 765-0557 3500 Carling Avenue | fax: (613) 765-2986 Nepean, ON K2H 8E9 Canada | email: cfriesen@nortelnetworks.com - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/