3 ms·

I don't like it when people touch the RNG and I think Wireguard glows.

• ratsmack 4y ago
  Anything that involves cryptography has to remain suspect.
  • ngcc_hk 4y ago
    Yes, ultimately as there is no perfect and never break system. But pushing that is pointless as we need to have a safeguard now. What should it be? We can't wait for the God or Godet to come. We need a human solution. And that might be faulty. Still, 5k lines are better than ...
    • midislack 4y ago
      It was working well before. And the Linux kernel has a history of highly pozzed, insecure RNG's that were given to the community by cryptographic "experts" as well.
      • tptacek 4y ago
        It famously was not working well before, and no such "history" exists.
• deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
• brobinson 4y ago
  Wireguard is probably the part of the kernel I trust _the most_ since it's < 5,000 lines of code and easily audited. I don't think the alphabet boys are involved in this one.
  • midislack 4y ago
    Have there been independent audits of it?
    • WelcomeShorty 4y ago
      https://www.wireguard.com/formal-verification/ https://www.wireguard.com/formal-verification/ You are welcome.
      • midislack 4y ago
        • tptacek 4y ago
          It's one of the most carefully reviewed pieces of cryptographic software on the Internet. You could just use Google, or, if you like, Google Scholar, to verify that for yourself. Please don't write troll comments on HN.