El lunes, 14 de mayo de 2018 13:43:18 -03 Dmitry Shachnev escribió: [snip] > > - We do not know the impact we create by disabling the getentropy feature. > > And normally that stuff is related to criptography. Believe me I don't > > want to mess with that. > > If we disable it, Qt will fall back to reading /dev/urandom directly. > > As I understand, it will be a bit less secure because it is vulnerable > to file descriptor exhaustion attacks, and also a bit slower. But on the > other hand, it is a traditional interface for getting randomness, and the > majority of software probably still uses it. > > See for details: > > - https://lwn.net/Articles/606141/ > - https://git.kernel.org/linus/c6e9d6f38894798696f23c8084ca7edbf16ee895 Quoting from the above: The rationale of this system call is to provide resiliance against file descriptor exhaustion attacks, where the attacker consumes all available file descriptors, forcing the use of the fallback code where /dev/[u]random is not available. Since the fallback code is often not well-tested, it is better to eliminate this potential failure mode entirely. So if we disable it we disable a feature providing a more robust method to provide randomness to ours users. In this case our users come first, so no, we should not disable this. -- Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanlon's_razor Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer http://perezmeyer.com.ar/ http://perezmeyer.blogspot.com/
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.