Re: [DISCUSSION PATCH 00/41] random: possible ways towards NIST SP800-90B compliance

[Willy Tarreau]

On Fri, Oct 02, 2020 at 02:38:36PM +0200, Torsten Duwe wrote:
> Almost two weeks passed and these are the "relevant" replies:
> 
> Jason personally does not like FIPS, and is afraid of
> "subpar crypto". Albeit this patch set strictly isn't about
> crypto at all; the crypto subsystem is in the unlucky position
> to just depend on a good entropy source.
> 
> Greg claims that Linux (kernel) isn't about choice, which is clearly
> wrong.

I think there's a small misunderstanding here, my understanding is
that for quite a while, the possibilities offered by the various
random subsystems or their proposed derivative used to range from
"you have to choose between a fast system that may be vulnerable
to some attacks, a system that might not be vulnerable to certain
attacks but might not always boot, or a slow system not vulnerable
to certain attacks". Greg's point seems to be that if we add an
option, it means it's yet another tradeoff between these possibilities
and that someone will still not be happy at the end of the chain. If
the proposed solution covers everything at once (performance,
reliability, unpredictability), then there probably is no more reason
for keeping alternate solutions at all, hence there's no need to give
the user the choice between multiple options when only one is known
to always be valid. At least that's how I see it and it makes sense
to me.

> And this is all ???

Possibly a lot of people got used to seeing the numerous versions
and are less attentive to new series, it's possible that your message
will wake everyone up.

Regards,
Willy