Back to News
Advertisement
Advertisement

⚡ Community Insights

Discussion Sentiment

60% Positive

Analyzed from 735 words in the discussion.

Trending Topics

#random#entropy#dev#https#linux#might#system#news#more#security

Discussion (18 Comments)Read Original on HackerNews

chaboud2 minutes ago
I woke up around 4am, read this, and wondered if I was still in a dream state given the meandering nature of it.

Were the man page musings written in response to the (alleged, but... uh... NSA) kleptographic backdoor in Dual_EC_DRBG? It requires multiple successive outputs to compromise and derive internal PRNG state, if memory serves.

In that one construction, /dev/random blocking on seeding would have a mild state-hiding advantage over /dev/urandom, I imagine... but, sheesh. Nobody use that generator.

xiphmontabout 2 hours ago
Half the entropy is trying to figure out which pieces of this article's text are supposed to be the silly falsehoods being corrected, and which pieces are just the second or third paragraph of a preceding 'Fact'. Deadpool is easier to follow.
roterabout 1 hour ago
I saw a note from an earlier year's discussion saying the css has been changed over the years. Perhaps it was easier then to discern fact or myth, truth or fiction.
stordoffabout 1 hour ago
I pulled up a random version from 2014, and it's more readable: https://web.archive.org/web/20141023082929/https://www.2uo.d...
notnmeyerabout 1 hour ago
glad i’m not the only one. i’m more or less baffled reading that.
sphabout 1 hour ago
This is a good place as any to ask, last time I didn't get any answer: has there ever been a serious Linux exploit from manipulating/predicting bad PRNG? Apart from the Debian SSH key generation fiasco from years ago, of course.

Having a good entropy source makes mathematical sense, and you want something a bit more "random" than a dice roll, but I wonder at which point it becomes security theatre.

Of all the possible avenues for exploiting a modern OS might have, I figure kernel PRNG prediction to be very, very far down the list of things to try.

vlovich12341 minutes ago
It’s both hard to attack but also a hugely audited system with a lot of attention paid.

That being said, [1] from 2012. The challenge with security is that structural weaknesses can take a long time to be discovered but once they are it’s catastrophic. Modern Linux finally switched to CSPRNG and proper construction and relies less on the numerology of entropy estimation it had been using (ie real security instead of theater). RDRAND has also been there for a long time on the x86 side which is useful because even if it’s insecure it gets mixed with other entropy sources like instruction execution time and scheduling jitter to protect standalone servers and iot devices.

Of course you hit the nail on the head in terms of the challenge of distinguishing security theater because you won’t know if the hardening is useful until there’s a problem, but there’s enough knowledgeable people on it that it’s less security theater than it might seem if you know what’s going on.

[1] https://www.usenix.org/system/files/conference/usenixsecurit...

hannob44 minutes ago
I think this one is among the most significant findings: https://factorable.net/

I also believe there were some android ASLR issues based on the same weakness (i.e., low early boot-time entropy).

But this is all quite old, and there've been massive improvements. Basically, "don't use a very old linux kernel" is your mitigation for these issues.

iamteddabout 1 hour ago
That was hard to tell where the additional commentary on the fact ended and the next myth started.
iamtedd44 minutes ago
Twelve years later, if there's still so much misconception about /dev/(u)random, has the man page been fixed?

Edit: can't count.

NooneAtAll3about 2 hours ago
(2014)
ape4about 2 hours ago
Ah, I wonder what's change since then.
vbezhenarabout 1 hour ago
Here's quote from the article:

> Note from 2024: This article was published on March 16th, 2014. It is still correct in its discussion of entropy and randomness, but the Linux kernel random number generator has been reworked several times since then and does not look like this anymore. Good news: the separation between /dev/urandom and /dev/random is practically gone.

My understanding is that on modern Linux system:

At early boot phases, /dev/random can still block, because not enough entropy has been seeded yet. /dev/urandom will not block, but the random data might be of poor quality and not suitable for crypto purposes. This happens very early in the boot, so probably it's not even possible to run user stuff at this time. At least on my laptop, the message "random: crng init done" gets logged almost instantly after boot and long before even initrd starts. Might be different for exotic platforms, I guess.

Once there was enough entropy seeded, both /dev/random and /dev/urandom works identically, they don't block and they return high quality random data. So for most userspace purposes, these files can be used interchangeably, one is not better than another.

aomixabout 1 hour ago
It started looking a whole lot like OpenBSD’s random number system. Private entropy pool from good system entropy seeds a ChaCha20 stream with random reseeds for forward secrecy in case of compromise. I think Linux is even more paranoid in the early boot environment where even in the presence of a seed file it prefers to get system entropy mixed in before confidently saying it can do crypto activities.
mananaysiempreabout 1 hour ago
> Might be different for exotic platforms, I guess.

Short-lived isolated VMs (like might be used for CI) are one place where entropy can be a problem. The relevant definition of “platform” here is less about the CPU architecture and more about the environment.