This is merely a historical archive of years 2008-2021, before the migration to mailman3.
A maintained and still updated list archive can be found at https://lists.osmocom.org/hyperkitty/list/OpenBSC@lists.osmocom.org/.
Harald Welte laforge at gnumonks.orgHi RS,
On Thu, Oct 05, 2017 at 12:40:11PM +0000, ringsignature at riseup.net wrote:
> Yes, I think getrandom() is a better default and in fact, the only safe
> interface. I suggest failing the build absent a getrandom() system
> call/glibc interface. Additionally, it would be good to ensure that any
> system running OpenBSC has some source of entropy beyond interrupts and
> timing - is that already the case?
We of course have no idea on what systems people are using the related
osmocom components on (such as OsmoNITB, OsmoMSC, OsmoSGSN). For some
of the smaller / deeper embedded devices (like e.g. the sysmoBTS 1002)
for sure there is no hardware random number generator and interrupts are
the only source of randomness.
However, in most realistic scenarios you would have more than one BTS
and run the NITB/MSC/SGSN on some kind of (embedded?) x86 or ARM board,
and most systems have had hardware random number generators for quite a
long time. Yes, the question is whether you trust those, but that's
completely off-topic here in this thread.
Regards,
Harald
--
- Harald Welte <laforge at gnumonks.org> http://laforge.gnumonks.org/
============================================================================
"Privacy in residential applications is a desirable marketing option."
(ETSI EN 300 175-7 Ch. A6)