Right, obviously. However, under no circumstances should /dev/urandom be used!
Amit Shah wrote:
>On (Sun) 16 Sep 2012 [13:42:46], H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>> On 06/19/2012 11:59 PM, Amit Shah wrote:
>> >Hello,
>> >
>> >Here's the 3rd iteration of the virtio-rng device. This update just
>> >rebase
On (Sun) 16 Sep 2012 [13:42:46], H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> On 06/19/2012 11:59 PM, Amit Shah wrote:
> >Hello,
> >
> >Here's the 3rd iteration of the virtio-rng device. This update just
> >rebases the patch on top of current master.
> >
> >Details on the patch in the commit message.
> >
>
> Hi every
On 09/16/2012 04:23 PM, Anthony Liguori wrote:
This is *exactly* what the problem is.
If using /dev/urandom is pointless--and so far, many people have made
compelling arguments that it is--then using /dev/random is seemingly
impossible to do fairly.
It is not merely pointless, it is a security
"H. Peter Anvin" writes:
> On 06/19/2012 11:59 PM, Amit Shah wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> Here's the 3rd iteration of the virtio-rng device. This update just
>> rebases the patch on top of current master.
>>
>> Details on the patch in the commit message.
>>
>
> Hi everyone...
>
> I just stumbled on th
On 06/19/2012 11:59 PM, Amit Shah wrote:
Hello,
Here's the 3rd iteration of the virtio-rng device. This update just
rebases the patch on top of current master.
Details on the patch in the commit message.
Hi everyone...
I just stumbled on this patchset after realizing that the virtio-rng
s
Hello,
Here's the 3rd iteration of the virtio-rng device. This update just
rebases the patch on top of current master.
Details on the patch in the commit message.
Please apply,
Amit
v3:
* rebase to master
* Add file to hw/Makefile.objs instead of Makefile.objs
* Rate-limit even
