IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dsfjdssdfsd] what not to do...

Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu> Wed, 02 April 2014 16:34 UTC

Return-Path: <tytso@thunk.org>
X-Original-To: dsfjdssdfsd@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dsfjdssdfsd@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BEA841A01FB for <dsfjdssdfsd@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 2 Apr 2014 09:34:31 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.801
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.801 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id kONqWkgu2cJz for <dsfjdssdfsd@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 2 Apr 2014 09:34:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from imap.thunk.org (imap.thunk.org [IPv6:2600:3c02::f03c:91ff:fe96:be03]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AAD271A01C8 for <dsfjdssdfsd@ietf.org>; Wed, 2 Apr 2014 09:34:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from root (helo=closure.thunk.org) by imap.thunk.org with local-esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <tytso@thunk.org>) id 1WVO6v-0001mV-BL; Wed, 02 Apr 2014 16:33:57 +0000
Received: by closure.thunk.org (Postfix, from userid 15806) id BAD35580386; Wed, 2 Apr 2014 12:33:54 -0400 (EDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=thunk.org; s=mail; t=1396456434; bh=R9EwtLq1RNAnlhlZzjbZQC1AXJCHducqzIyVutFZtW4=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=0nZ4DZ8TX2L0N535GhJHe5pdJfeatXQv3RRIsoWycoGgfhC5LwQA9fpQTm2mW79s8 NmfQt47iPCyc7M2amNCJd0V2MJbp5BaZ7NvaEjUwUTYUcASml1fpmzPbI1Vl7w4fSS bM/BO4CEM0/3QJV3sBJ+BDHb0sWHIw54oFbfeYLs=
Date: Wed, 02 Apr 2014 12:33:54 -0400
From: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>
To: Donald Eastlake <d3e3e3@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20140402163354.GG6901@thunk.org>
References: <533AF317.5070901@cs.tcd.ie> <CACXcFm=ts6JWuW+pQtaqZ720QDxnEa22UZW2NiBYMgCCV7MPuw@mail.gmail.com> <CAF4+nEF8N5C7zmGh5TBnp29zP1Fi2PMzoU4x4EEH8hY82PnS0w@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAF4+nEF8N5C7zmGh5TBnp29zP1Fi2PMzoU4x4EEH8hY82PnS0w@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)
X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: <locally generated>
X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: tytso@thunk.org
X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on imap.thunk.org); SAEximRunCond expanded to false
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dsfjdssdfsd/5snKgoMYrnz2cZ6BFhydcj86jS4
Cc: "dsfjdssdfsd@ietf.org" <dsfjdssdfsd@ietf.org>, Sandy Harris <sandyinchina@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [dsfjdssdfsd] what not to do...
X-BeenThere: dsfjdssdfsd@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: "The dsfjdssdfsd list provides a venue for discussion of randomness in IETF protocols, for example related to updating RFC 4086." <dsfjdssdfsd.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dsfjdssdfsd>, <mailto:dsfjdssdfsd-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dsfjdssdfsd/>
List-Post: <mailto:dsfjdssdfsd@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dsfjdssdfsd-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dsfjdssdfsd>, <mailto:dsfjdssdfsd-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 02 Apr 2014 16:34:32 -0000

On Wed, Apr 02, 2014 at 10:57:34AM -0400, Donald Eastlake wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> Yes, the "bad ideas" section of RFC 4086bis
> (draft-eastlake-randomness3-00) seems like a good place to collect
> additional things not to do.
> 
> I am planning to update that draft soon...

Is this list the best list of have discussions about that draft?  Or
are you planning on using some other wg list?

Some things that I might add as caveats is that the recommendations
about using disk timing is based on research done decades ago, and
disk drives have changed quite a bit since then.  I believe there
probably is *some* entropy in spinning disks, but it may not be as
much as possible.

In the section about clocks, it might be worthy to note that on modern
CPU's, very often many clocks are derived from a single master
oscillator.  If there are subsystems where you have two clocks that
are _not_ derived from the same oscillator, there may be an
opportunity to pick up a few bits of entropy.  (And I suspect that's
probably one of the remaining sources of entropy from disk drives
these days.)

Cheers,

						- Ted

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email