[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CACYkhxhu2LpTqk6oFX8dK3Z-=c2jmtnfMpHbuFbjXFhkW0Z7jw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2013 10:09:49 +1100
From: Michael Samuel <mik@...net.net>
To: oss-security@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: CVE Request: static IV used in Percona XtraBackup
On 27 November 2013 05:17, Florian Weimer <fweimer@...hat.com> wrote:
> Is suppose this is part of the fix.
>
> +void
> +xb_crypt_init_iv()
> +{
> + uint seed = time(NULL);
> + srandom(seed);
> +}
That's at-best a 32-bit nonce, but would only repeat of srandom() had
collisions. Presumably more than 1 backup a second is rare?
Just reading data from /dev/urandom would be more robust.
On a side note, a constant IV isn't fatal so long as a unique key is
used every time. Is the key random, password derived or constant?
Regards,
Michael
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Please check out the
Open Source Software Security Wiki, which is counterpart to this
mailing list.
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
