Re: [PROPOSAL/PATCH] Fortuna PRNG in /dev/random

[Theodore Ts'o]

On Mon, Sep 27, 2004 at 03:45:02PM -0400, Jean-Luc Cooke wrote:
> > Actually trying to replace the partial MD4 might be worth an attempt: 
> > I'm certain that the partial MD4 is not the best/fastest way to generate 
> > sequence numbers.
> 
> It infact uses two full SHA1 hashs for tcp sequence numbers (endian and
> padding issues aside).  my patch aims to do this in 1 AES256 Encrypt or 2
> AES256 encrypts for ipv6.

No, that's not correct.  We rekey once at most every five minutes, and
that requires a SHA hash, but in the normal case, it's only a partial MD4.

An AES encrypt for every TCP connection *might* be faster, but I'd
want to time it to make sure, and doing a bulk test ala "openssl
speed" isn't necessarily going to be predictive, as I've discussed earlier.

						- Ted
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/