MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <2812305.zGuAXT15AM@positron.chronox.de>
References: <20170606174804.31124-1-Jason@zx2c4.com> <1606799.lNpamfCTbW@tauon.chronox.de>
 <20170618154625.5qu3eduqjtgk5bal@thunk.org> <2812305.zGuAXT15AM@positron.chronox.de>
From: "Jason A. Donenfeld" <Jason@zx2c4.com>
Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2017 21:12:55 +0200
Message-ID: <CAHmME9pqUR+mSeG8SNgCKvxnayPUhVn0K+Mw4EsKuTcMOhNASw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [kernel-hardening] Re: [PATCH v4 13/13] random: warn when kernel
 uses unseeded randomness
To: =?UTF-8?Q?Stephan_M=C3=BCller?= <smueller@chronox.de>
Cc: "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>, kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com,
        Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>,
        Linux Crypto Mailing List <linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>, Eric Biggers <ebiggers3@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Length: 727
Lines: 13

On Sun, Jun 18, 2017 at 7:55 PM, Stephan Müller <smueller@chronox.de> wrote:
> But you bring up an interesting point: if it is true you say that it is hard
> for people to use differnent types of APIs regarding entropy and random
> numbers right (which I would concur with), and considering that you imply that
> get_random_bytes, get_random_u32 and get_random_u64 have the same security
> strength, why do we have these three APIs to begin with? The get_random_bytes
> API would then be more than enough.

Because there are efficiences we can benefit from for getting integer
sized outputs.

Use get_random_{u32,u64} when you want a secure random number.
Use get_random_bytes when you want a longer secure random bytestring.