Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH 07/10] random: add new get_random_bytes_arch() function | From | Matt Mackall <> | Date | Thu, 05 Jul 2012 16:45:12 -0500 |
| |
On Thu, 2012-07-05 at 11:35 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > If Intel's rng really isn't trustworthy, they'll get a *huge* black > eye for it. It would be a total PR disaster for Intel, so they have > huge incentives to be trustworthy.
Just like the huge black eye that _every major US telecom company_ got when they got caught colluding with the NSA to spy on Americans in obvious violation of US law? You'll recall that it was such a *huge* PR disaster... that they're all still doing it today(!), that Congress retroactively changed the law(!), and that the whistleblower was indicted for espionage(!).
I agree that Intel's hardware is very probably not backdoored, but that's simply not a standard by which threats should be measured in this field. Treating a backdoor scenario as outside the realm of possibility based on appeals to reputation given such obvious, massive, and recent precedent to the contrary is... not a typical security mindset, to put it mildly.
Lastly, note that it would take a single well-placed engineer to insert the backdoor, by just masking out some parts of the AES data path. No collusion by Intel at a corporate level is actually even necessary.
Generating random bytes is not so performance critical that you should trade all protection from potential threats for Gbps of throughput. By all means, USE the HWRNG's output, but not raw. Mix it with other entropy sources first.
-- Mathematics is the supreme nostalgia of our time.
| |