/dev/random vs. /dev/urandom

Development
25

That section might need an update for Linux 5.6.

Please don’t delete it yet. Feel free to add a link or opinion there. I more time to research this.

swap-file-creator/usr/share/swap-file-creator/swap-file-creator at master · Kicksecure/swap-file-creator · GitHub reads from /dev/random but it’s written in bash so no libsodium.

Seems like this would have fit actually here better:

At first thought seems in a later kernel version getrandom() without GRND_INSECURE makes sense. Otherwise when it’s not possible to use getrandom() keep using /dev/random.

Quote Entropy, Randomness, /dev/random vs /dev/urandom, Entropy Sources, Entropy Gathering Daemons, RDRAND

Proponents of the viewpoint that “/dev/random is obsolete, use /dev/urandom, always” should explain:

  • Why Linux offers both, /dev/random and /dev/urandom and why if it is “really the same” isn’t just a symlink from the one to the other.
  • Why Linux does not use the same code paths for /dev/random and /dev/urandom? Why have this distinction in the first place?

That’s an interesting link. I am going to read it. At first sight, seems it would be good to be added to the collection here:

Also generally that page could use improvements.

I am making this post to avoid over eagerly deletions of anything on that wiki page before I had a chance to catch up.