Re: [PATCH] random: add blocking facility to urandom

Sandy Harris
2011-09-08T02:43:41Z

Jarod Wilson <jarod@redhat.com> wrote:

> Ted Ts'o wrote:

>> Yeah, but there are userspace programs that depend on urandom not
>> blocking... so your proposed change would break them.
>> ...

> But only if you've set the sysctl to a non-zero value, ...
>
> But again, I want to stress that out of the box, there's absolutely no
> change to the way urandom behaves, no blocking, this *only* kicks in if you
> twiddle the sysctl because you have some sort of security requirement that
> mandates it.

So it only breaks things on systems with high security requirements?