Conversation

Replying to and
That doesn't sound right. Both Linux devices are conditioned, the difference is just that urandom doesn't block waiting for entropy. I assume your conditioner doesn't freewheel without input entropy, right? If so its output would be like /dev/random.
1
2
Replying to and
You can set a policy on how often entropy needs to be re-seeded into the conditioner. In practice, because the CPU runs relatively slowly on Precursor, and because there is a FIFO that feeds the conditioner, any practical policy never blocks.
1
1
Only difference with /dev/urandom now is that unlike getrandom or /dev/random it prints a warning to the kernel log and doesn't block when the CSPRNG isn't initialized yet. Even with the obsolete broken API design throttling output based on input, it was still a software CSPRNG.
Yes, since Linux 5.6: twitter.com/DanielMicay/st Linux 5.4 added active seeding of the CSPRNG when it blocks. /dev/random and getrandom are both completely sensible APIs now. Ideally, they would change /dev/urandom to do the same thing as /dev/random and getrandom though.
Quote Tweet
Linux 5.6 removed the cargo cult blocking CSPRNG. /dev/random now works the same way as getrandom. It only blocks until CSPRNG is initialized after booting. GRND_RANDOM flag for getrandom doesn't do anything anymore. /dev/urandom still doesn't wait for CSPRNG initialization.
Show this thread
3