Re: [PATCH] random: add random_initialized command line param

On Wed, May 20, 2015 at 08:29:19AM +0200, Stephan Mueller wrote:

But I see that such a change may not be warranted at this
point. Though, I see that discussion may rise again in the future
when such new requirements for 256 bit keys (not only AES, thanks
Sandy for mentioning :-) ) are commonly raised.

Given that you would need a 15,360-bit RSA key to have a key strength
equivalent to a 256-bit key (and a 3072-bit RSA key is equivalent to
128-bit symmetric keys, and there are plenty of people still using
2048-bit keys), permit me to be a little skeptical about the value of
256 bit keys for anything other than marketing value...

If you trust ECC, you'd "only" need a 7,680 bit ECC key.  But the ECC
curves under discussion today are (at least) an order of magnitude
smaller.

And if it's just to make gullible rubes feel safer, I don't see the
real point of non-blocking random pool threshold larger than the
safety of the whole system is constrainted by public key crypto.

So, let us disregard the patch until hard requirements are coming up.

Sounds like a fine idea to me.

              				- Ted