From: Theodore Ts'o Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/6] /dev/random - a new approach Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2016 22:51:55 -0400 Message-ID: <20160422025155.GA6690@thunk.org> References: <9192755.iDgo3Omyqe@positron.chronox.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: herbert@gondor.apana.org.au, linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, sandyinchina@gmail.com To: Stephan Mueller Return-path: Received: from imap.thunk.org ([74.207.234.97]:55542 "EHLO imap.thunk.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751618AbcDVCwC (ORCPT ); Thu, 21 Apr 2016 22:52:02 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <9192755.iDgo3Omyqe@positron.chronox.de> Sender: linux-crypto-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: I still have a massive problem with the claims that the "Jitter" RNG provides any amount of entropy. Just because you and I might not be able to analyze it doesn't mean that somebody else couldn't. After all, DUAL-EC DRNG was very complicated and hard to analyze. So would be something like AES(NSA_KEY, COUNTER++) Very hard to analyze indeed. Shall we run statistical tests? They'll pass with flying colors. Secure? Not so much. - Ted