Re: [libvirt] RFC: virtio-rng and /dev/urandom

On April 15, 2016 3:41:34 AM PDT, Cole Robinson <crobinso(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: >Libvirt currently rejects using host /dev/urandom as an input source >for a >virtio-rng device. The only accepted sources are /dev/random and >/dev/hwrng. >This is the result of discussions on qemu-devel around when the feature >was >first added (2013). Examples: > >http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2012-09/msg02387.html >https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2013-03/threads.html#00023 > >libvirt's rejection of /dev/urandom has generated some complaints from >users: > >https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1074464 >* cited: http://www.2uo.de/myths-about-urandom/ >http://www.redhat.com/archives/libvir-list/2016-March/msg01062.html >http://www.redhat.com/archives/libvir-list/2016-April/msg00186.html > >I think it's worth having another discussion about this, at least with >a >recent argument in one place so we can put it to bed. I'm CCing a bunch >of >people. I think the questions are: > >1) is the original recommendation to never use virtio-rng+/dev/urandom >correct? > >2) regardless of #1, should we continue to reject that config in >libvirt? > >Thanks, >Cole Using /dev/urandom for virtio-rng, *except* perhaps for a small seed, it a complete waste of cycles. There is absolutely no reason to have one prng feed another.