by mail.netbsd.org with SMTP; 4 Oct 2000 18:08:42 -0000
	id 20B91D221; Wed,  4 Oct 2000 11:08:40 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2000 11:08:39 -0700
From: Jason R Thorpe <thorpej@zembu.com>
To: John Hawkinson <jhawk@MIT.EDU>
Cc: Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino <itojun@netbsd.org>,
	tech-security@netbsd.org
Subject: Re: sshd rnd requirements?
Message-ID: <20001004110839.H898@dr-evil.z.zembu.com>
Reply-To: thorpej@zembu.com
Mail-Followup-To: Jason R Thorpe <thorpej@zembu.com>,
	John Hawkinson <jhawk@MIT.EDU>,
	Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino <itojun@netbsd.org>,
	tech-security@netbsd.org
References: <200010041800.OAA03274@multics.mit.edu>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.2i
In-Reply-To: <200010041800.OAA03274@multics.mit.edu>; from jhawk@MIT.EDU on Wed, Oct 04, 2000 at 02:00:48PM -0400
Organization: Zembu Labs, Inc.

On Wed, Oct 04, 2000 at 02:00:48PM -0400, John Hawkinson wrote:

 > Why is this mandatory? Is there a discussion of the history somewhere?
 > It seems like this reduces flexibility in a bunch of cases, as well
 > as portability of our sshd (not our primary goal, true, but...).

It's the only source of randomness that the crypto library can really
do.

-- 
        -- Jason R. Thorpe <thorpej@zembu.com>