RE: [PATCH 1/2] wrapper: add a helper to generate numbers from a CSPRNG

[<rsbecker@nexbridge.com>]

On November 16, 2021 1:23 PM, Taylor Blau wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 16, 2021 at 11:01:20AM -0500, rsbecker@nexbridge.com wrote:
> > On November 16, 2021 10:31 AM, Jeff King wrote:
> > > On Tue, Nov 16, 2021 at 03:35:41AM +0000, brian m. carlson wrote:
> > >
> > > > The order of options is also important here.  On systems with
> > > > arc4random, which is most of the BSDs, we use that, since, except
> > > > on MirBSD, it uses ChaCha20, which is extremely fast, and sits
> > > > entirely in userspace, avoiding a system call.  We then prefer
> > > > getrandom over getentropy, because the former has been available
> > > > longer on Linux, and finally, if none of those are available, we
> > > > use /dev/urandom, because most Unix-like operating systems provide
> > > > that API.  We prefer options that don't involve device files when
> > > > possible because those work in some restricted environments where
> device files may not be available.
> > >
> > > I wonder if we'll need a low-quality fallback for older systems
> > > which don't even have /dev/urandom. Because it's going to be used in
> > > such a core part of the system (tempfiles), this basically becomes a
> > > hard requirement for using Git at all.
> > >
> > > I can't say I'm excited in general to be introducing a dependency
> > > like this, just because of the portability headaches. But it may be
> > > the least bad thing (especially if we can fall back to the existing behavior).
> > > One alternative would be to build on top of the system mkstemp(),
> > > which makes it libc's problem. I'm not sure if we'd run into problems
> there, though.
> >
> > None of /dev/urandom, /dev/random, or mkstemp are available on some
> > platforms, including NonStop. This is not a good dependency to add.
> > One variant PRNGD is used in ia64 OpenSSL, while the CPU random
> > generator in hardware is used on x86. I cannot get behind this at all.
> > Libc is also not used in or available to our port. I am very worried
> > about this direction.
> 
> I share Peff's lack of enthusiasm about the dependency situation. But making
> Git depend on having /dev/urandom available is simply not feasible, as you
> point out.
> 
> I wonder if the suitable fall-back should be the existing behavior of
> git_mkstemps_mode()? That leaves us in a somewhat-disappointing
> situation of not having fully resolved the DOS attack on all platforms.
> But it makes our dependency situation less complicated, and leaves things no
> worse off than the were before on platforms like NonStop.

The general advice on NonStop is to delegate handling DOS attacks to either SSH or firewalls (preferably). I have yet to see anyone publish a git service on that platform outside of using SSH anyway - and if they did, they would get a pretty fierce glare from me.
-Randall