From: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
To: "Jason A. Donenfeld" <Jason@zx2c4.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Dominik Brodowski <linux@dominikbrodowski.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] random: split initialization into early step and later step
Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2022 07:28:25 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <202209270728.5FE3CB0@keescook> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220927110957.1620347-1-Jason@zx2c4.com>
On Tue, Sep 27, 2022 at 01:09:57PM +0200, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote:
> The full RNG initialization relies on some timestamps, made possible
> with general functions like time_init() and timekeeping_init(). However,
> these are only available rather late in initialization. Meanwhile, other
> things, such as memory allocator functions, make use of the RNG much
> earlier.
>
> So split RNG initialization into two phases. We can give arch randomness
> very early on, and then later, after timekeeping and such are available,
> initialize the rest.
>
> This ensures that, for example, slabs are properly randomized if RDRAND
> is available. Without this, CONFIG_SLAB_FREELIST_RANDOM=y loses a degree
> of its security, because its random seed is potentially deterministic,
> since it hasn't yet incorporated RDRAND. It also makes it possible to
> use a better seed in kfence, which currently relies on only the cycle
> counter.
>
> Another positive consequence is that on systems with RDRAND, running
> with CONFIG_WARN_ALL_UNSEEDED_RANDOM=y results in no warnings at all.
>
> One subtle side effect of this change is that on systems with no RDRAND,
> RDTSC is now only queried by random_init() once, committing the moment
> of the function call, instead of multiple times as before. This is
> intentional, as the multiple RDTSCs in a loop before weren't
> accomplishing very much, with jitter being better provided by
> try_to_generate_entropy(). Plus, filling blocks with RDTSC is still
> being done in extract_entropy(), which is necessarily called before
> random bytes are served anyway.
>
> Cc: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
> Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
> Reviewed-by: Dominik Brodowski <linux@dominikbrodowski.net>
> Signed-off-by: Jason A. Donenfeld <Jason@zx2c4.com>
Reviewed-by: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
Thanks for the updates!
--
Kees Cook
prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-09-27 14:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-09-26 21:31 [PATCH v2 1/2] random: split initialization into early step and later step Jason A. Donenfeld
2022-09-26 21:31 ` [PATCH v2 2/2] kfence: use better stack hash seed Jason A. Donenfeld
2022-09-27 6:35 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] random: split initialization into early step and later step Dominik Brodowski
2022-09-27 8:28 ` Jason A. Donenfeld
2022-09-27 8:30 ` Dominik Brodowski
2022-09-27 8:40 ` Jason A. Donenfeld
2022-09-27 11:09 ` [PATCH v3] " Jason A. Donenfeld
2022-09-27 14:28 ` Kees Cook [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=202209270728.5FE3CB0@keescook \
--to=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=Jason@zx2c4.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@dominikbrodowski.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox