Re: IPsec performance (in)dependent on ingress rate?

2011-09-04 Thread Sandy Harris
On Thu, Sep 1, 2011 at 10:24 PM, Adam Tisovsky tisov...@gmail.com wrote:

 I’m doing some benchmarks of IPsec performance on Cisco router and I
 have experienced the situation described below. My question is whether
 anybody has performed similar tests on Linux (StrongSWAN, OpenSWAN,…)
 or any other security gateway and can tell how did it behave.

There is some info for FreeS/WAN, ancestor of the ones you mention:
http://www.freeswan.org/freeswan_trees/freeswan-2.06/doc/performance.html
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-crypto in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html


Re: [PATCH] random: add blocking facility to urandom

2011-09-04 Thread Sandy Harris
On Fri, Sep 2, 2011 at 10:37 PM, Jarod Wilson ja...@redhat.com wrote:

 Certain security-related certifications and their respective review
 bodies have said that they find use of /dev/urandom for certain
 functions, such as setting up ssh connections, is acceptable, but if and
 only if /dev/urandom can block after a certain threshold of bytes have
 been read from it with the entropy pool exhausted. ...

 At present, urandom never blocks, even after all entropy has been
 exhausted from the entropy input pool. random immediately blocks when
 the input pool is exhausted. Some use cases want behavior somewhere in
 between these two, where blocking only occurs after some number have
 bytes have been read following input pool entropy exhaustion. Its
 possible to accomplish this and make it fully user-tunable, by adding a
 sysctl to set a max-bytes-after-0-entropy read threshold for urandom. In
 the out-of-the-box configuration, urandom behaves as it always has, but
 with a threshold value set, we'll block when its been exceeded.

Is it possible to calculate what that threshold should be? The Yarrow
paper includes arguments about the frequency of rekeying required to
keep a block cipher based generator secure. Is there any similar
analysis for the has-based pool? ( If not, should we switch to a
block cipher?)

/dev/urandom should not block unless both it has produced enough
output since the last rekey that it requires a rekey and there is not
enough entropy in the input pool to drive that rekey.

But what is a reasonable value for enough in that sentence?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-crypto in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html