Slashdot Mirror
FreeBSD-Current Random Number Generator Broken
First time accepted submitter bobo the hobo writesThe FreeBSD random number has been discovered to be generating possibly predictable SSH keys and SSL certificates for months. Time to regenerate your keys and certs if using FreeBSD-Current. A message to the freebsd-current mailing list reads in part: "If you are running a current kernel r273872 or later, please upgrade
your kernel to r278907 or later immediately and regenerate keys. I discovered an issue where the new framework code was not calling
randomdev_init_reader, which means that read_random(9) was not returning
good random data. read_random(9) is used by arc4random(9) which is
the primary method that arc4random(3) is seeded from."
Netcraft Confirms FreeBSD is dying
I discovered an issue where the new framework code was not calling randomdev_init_reader
So who was responsible for introducing that change? Let's smoke out the mole.
Bug fixed in bleeding-edge codebase. News at 11.
I've heard the same things said. However, and I don't say this in jest, that while no security in any OS is perfect, OpenBSD comes the closest due to their audits. Hence, out of the BSDs I do use and endorse, it's OpenBSD.
Some dislike Theo, but he's intensely good at running a tight ship, and since 1999 when I first started using OpenBSD for security-based boxes, I've never had an issue.
Wouldn't it make more sense to patch the kernel to make the correct function calls then update to a kernel with more changes that may not be tested/stable for a given usage scenario?
Silence is a state of mime.
since 1999 when I first started using OpenBSD for security-based boxes, I've never had an issue.
That you know about.
According to many people on this site almost every Linux user have now switched to FreeBSD because of Systemd.
The -current is not a release — it is the trunk of the development tree. Using for anything important — such as data, that may be worthwhile enough for your enemies to hack for — is silly. Far worse bugs may exist in -current — or be introduced at any point.
Stick to releases — or one of the -stable branches — for anything, that's not about working on FreeBSD itself.
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
Bleeding edge software has bugs?? what
...before the NSA hooks are all discovered and corrected in the Linux community.
Man, what shills.
All of these problems will be solved when systemd integrates Rand
Really? Was it broken? Did someone want to add "more randomness"? Why would anyone be messing around with this code? Has the random number generator been flawed for years? It bears further scrutiny.
FreeBSD is the new Linux. Full of religious fan boys who act like it was written by God. This old tired line of "Linux is immune to security issues" is now more commonly used with FreeBSD (by idiots).
You know who started the original BSD? This guy did. He also created the original vi editor, was the creator of the modern day TCP/IP stack, and had a huge hand in the creation of Java. What, praytell, have you done?
"Set a man a fire, he'll be warm for the rest of the night. Set a man afire, he'll be warm for the rest of his life."
Why do I get both my 7 mana-cost cards on my first two draws?
Why does the best card in my hand always wind up being the card that gets discarded on random discards?
Why is the board-clear that I need always at position 30 in the draw pile?
It is because they built their server backend on FreeBSD!
It is all so clear now.
This seems like an odd bug to have happen, how bad were the effects? Just 'weaker' randomness, or without randomdev_init_reader do the random routines just return the same series of pseudorandom digits every time?
Also, obligatory Dilbert reference
I do not deploy Linux. Ever.
I just checked on openbsd.org, and I loved the FAQ section! ...
4.13 - Common installation problems
4.13.1 - My Compaq only recognizes 16M RAM
4.13.2 - My i386 won't boot after install
When blackboxed, even "return 5" is indistinguishable from a true random number generator.
People want noisy numbers, not random numbers. Which is a good thing, because a true random number generator will never exist.
...while no security in any OS is perfect, OpenBSD comes the closest due to their audits.
Or maybe, just maybe... The more obscure the OS the less bugs are discovered.
Not saying OpenBSD security policy and practices isn't a good thing, but it might be less of a factor than its low market share (Security through minority).
So who cares??
http://saveie6.com/
Why would you expect the OS to solve your random number problem for you? It's software. It has no means to know what platform it is really running on and no means to understand the min-entropy of any input it sees. It is the wrong thing in the wrong place and it cannot 'guarantee' secure random numbers unless it gets guarantees of min-entropy sources from the hardware it runs on and uses it correctly.
If you hardware doesn't offer a hardware RNG with specific claims for min-entropy or computational bounds on the adversary, find a new vendor, because there isn't any software that's going to solve it for you.
I should use this sig to advertise my book ISBN-13 : 978-1501515132.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
"Anyone attempting to generate random numbers by deterministic means is, of course, living in a state of sin." -- John von Neumann
Just don't use keys for remote ssh logins. I know, keys are supposed to be all that any more. But based on my experience fending off billions of script kiddy attempts from my home system, it appears they aren't worth the effort and may even be counter productive.
I say this because my home server faces the world and allows anyone who wants to, to make an attempt to login via ssh on port 22. You may say this is completely insane, but my logs suggest it isn't that bad. The overwhelming majority of all attempts on my system attempt to come straight in as root. As everyone knows, you can very easily disable root login in your sshd.conf file which leaves the person on the other end completely incapable of knowing whether or not they ever got your root password right as the response is the same.
The end result is they make their 10,000+ attempts in a couple hours, then leave and never come back. They might take a few parting shots at other well known account names but they won't get in that way either.
Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
You have to really want BSD on your computer for it to stay there, so it's in no danger of suffering from Linux's fate. Linux started out similarly, but slowly got dumbed down to the point where any corporation could get away with using it as a cheap (as in beer) alternative.
I'm not trying to offer a lame excuse for BSD, but BSD will recover from this in short order. Linux will never regain its roots as a nuts and bolts OS and it will never shed its Communist roots of forced misappropriation of copyright. Linux, quite honestly, is badly aged wine that has turned to vinegar.
That seems like a perfectly sensible step on their way to world domination.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R...
It's funny how the more things change, the more they stay the same...
4.13.6 - I have no floppy or CD-ROM on my machine
not at all.
with a security box you have additional tools which detect a breach.
not having an issue doesn't mean someone else didn't find a bug
it means the system stayed clean and wasn't infected.
I keep a few windows boxes around just to see what the exploits are that are being deployed to them.
never ever mold what I fnd to my own uses. honest.
I have never seen a bunch of Linux users get so excited over a bug in a development branch before.
What, it has not done that yet?
Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
As apparently nobody bothered to find out, this is a bleeding-edge developer snapshot, not anything that was in any way "released", hence no normal users are affected.
I do have two questions though:
1. Why was that code touched in the first place?
2. Who touched that code and broke it?
It may be simple incompetence (it usually is), but it may also be a mole in the FreeBSD project. It should be ascertained that the person that did this did so in good faith. Still, some level of shaming is required even then to make people pay attention when they touch security-critical code and keep their fingers off it unless they have the required level of skill and understanding and there is actually a real need to touch that code.
Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
This guy is the low hanging fruit that keeps all those automated attacks from China from developing something more sophisticated :P Not that i'm suggesting security through obscurity is the only way or anything... just an extra line of Darwinian defence.
Do you mean to say that the tool behind the die roller for my D&D characters is all wrong?
I have to re-roll my characters all over again!
Tracy Johnson
Old fashioned text games hosted below:
http://empire.openmpe.com/
BT