Skip to Content [alt-c]
In reply to LibreSSL's PRNG is Unsafe on Linux [Update: LibreSSL fork fix]
If an application knows it is going to chroot it's child away from accessing /dev/urandom, why doesn't the parent take responsibility to provide a named pipe in the chroot environment?
Part of the problem also seems to be that to be a drop-in replacement to OpenSSL requires leaving the API the way it is. Hopefully if LibreSSL gain popularity, they will be able to revise the API to include such things as being able to specify the entropy quality where the calling app decides if a scary function is an acceptable source of entropy or not.
Reply
Your comment will be public. To contact me privately, email me. Please keep your comment polite, on-topic, and comprehensible. Your comment may be held for moderation before being published.
Your Name: (Optional; will be published)
Your Email Address: (Optional; will not be published)
Your Website: (Optional; will be published)
>
monospaced
Post a Reply
Your comment will be public. To contact me privately, email me. Please keep your comment polite, on-topic, and comprehensible. Your comment may be held for moderation before being published.