Use something better than /dev/urandom on FreeBSD

[briansmith]

The main drivers here are performance and the ability to work correctly and automatically in a chroot/jail.

This was split off from #316, which is now OpenBSD-only. Note that iOS and MacOS are issue #149.

See:

• #316 (comment)
• #316 (comment), which among other things references https://paragonie.com/blog/2016/05/how-generate-secure-random-numbers-in-various-programming-languages.
• What LibreSSL does and why.
• What libsodium does and why.
• CVE-2014-2970
• https://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-security/2014-July/007849.html
• https://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-security/2014-July/007853.html
• https://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-security/2014-July/007868.html

From reading various FreeBSD mailing list messages, it seems like FreeBSD doesn't have a good way to guarantee fork-safety, which is the same problem that Linux has. Therefore, it seems like we should always be getting random values from the OS. That means, AFAICT, either reading from /dev/[u]random or the KERN_ARND sysctl. Note the potential problems with KERN_ARND mentioned in the linked-to comments above.

I don't understand this issue fully, but it seems that FreeBSD has a RANDOM kernel module that can be disabled, and in that disabled state it may be problematic to do anything better than reading from /dev/[u]random: "RW mentioned kernels without RANDOM, being an awkward situation for which it seems necessary to fall back to the PRNG in userland." - https://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-security/2014-July/007869.html.

[briansmith]

See also https://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current/2015-February/054580.html.

[briansmith]

See also https://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current/2015-February/054580.html.

[myfreeweb]

LibreSSL just uses arc4random. The rationale was, basically, "deal with it".

But they have added locking and fork detection using pthread_atfork on FreeBSD. The comment says that atfork fails silently "if a program does not link to -lthr". That's not a problem for a Rust library — just link to thr in build.rs! Cargo is nice :) So we do have a good way to guarantee fork-safety.

They also have an emulation of getentropy using KERN_ARND.

[myfreeweb]

LibreSSL just uses arc4random. The rationale was, basically, "deal with it".

But they have added locking and fork detection using pthread_atfork on FreeBSD. The comment says that atfork fails silently "if a program does not link to -lthr". That's not a problem for a Rust library — just link to thr in build.rs! Cargo is nice :) So we do have a good way to guarantee fork-safety.

They also have an emulation of getentropy using KERN_ARND.

[briansmith]

Thanks!

They also have an emulation of getentropy using KERN_ARND.

This looks the most promising to me.

Probably we should check what libsodium does too.

[briansmith]

Thanks!

They also have an emulation of getentropy using KERN_ARND.

This looks the most promising to me.

Probably we should check what libsodium does too.

[myfreeweb]

They have a complicated file full of #ifdefs, but this seems like the part we're interested in:

#if defined(__OpenBSD__) || defined(__CloudABI__)
# define HAVE_SAFE_ARC4RANDOM 1
#endif

It's interesting that CloudABI's arc4random is considered safe, but not FreeBSD's. CloudABI runs on FreeBSD using, I think, the same arc4random as FreeBSD ABI programs. But on CloudABI you can't just open /dev/random, so it's not like they have a choice :D

[myfreeweb]

They have a complicated file full of #ifdefs, but this seems like the part we're interested in:

#if defined(__OpenBSD__) || defined(__CloudABI__)
# define HAVE_SAFE_ARC4RANDOM 1
#endif

It's interesting that CloudABI's arc4random is considered safe, but not FreeBSD's. CloudABI runs on FreeBSD using, I think, the same arc4random as FreeBSD ABI programs. But on CloudABI you can't just open /dev/random, so it's not like they have a choice :D

[briansmith]

https://svnweb.freebsd.org/base?view=revision&revision=317015

Replace the RC4 algorithm for generating in-kernel secure random
numbers with Chacha20. Keep the API, though, as that is what the
other *BSD's have done.

Use the boot-time entropy stash (if present) to bootstrap the
in-kernel entropy source.

[briansmith]

https://svnweb.freebsd.org/base?view=revision&revision=317015

Replace the RC4 algorithm for generating in-kernel secure random
numbers with Chacha20. Keep the API, though, as that is what the
other *BSD's have done.

Use the boot-time entropy stash (if present) to bootstrap the
in-kernel entropy source.

[briansmith]

See also https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=182610.

[briansmith]

See also https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=182610.

[myfreeweb]

Somehow I only just discovered this: the rand crate uses KERN_ARND sysctl!

[myfreeweb]

Somehow I only just discovered this: the rand crate uses KERN_ARND sysctl!

[myfreeweb]

FreeBSD 12 (current dev branch) now has all the interfaces: getentropy(3), getrandom(2).

The getentropy implementation uses the getrandom syscall, but falls back to KERN_ARND if you install a new libc but keep an old kernel.

The getrandom syscall is faster than KERN_ARND but equivalent in quality (and thread/fork safety I guess??).

So I think dynamically probing for getentropy would make sense, but just using KERN_ARND like the rand crate does will still be fine.

[myfreeweb]

FreeBSD 12 (current dev branch) now has all the interfaces: getentropy(3), getrandom(2).

The getentropy implementation uses the getrandom syscall, but falls back to KERN_ARND if you install a new libc but keep an old kernel.

The getrandom syscall is faster than KERN_ARND but equivalent in quality (and thread/fork safety I guess??).

So I think dynamically probing for getentropy would make sense, but just using KERN_ARND like the rand crate does will still be fine.

[briansmith]

So I think dynamically probing for getentropy would make sense, but just using KERN_ARND like the rand crate does will still be fine.

I think it would be good to try to use getentropy if it is available (using weak linkage) and fallback to the /dev/urandom fallback if that default feature is enabled. That's what we'd have to do on macOS, IIUC, and I'd like to minimize the amount of BSD-specific code we have to maintain, since we have so few BSD users.

Remember:

The main drivers here are performance and the ability to work correctly and automatically in a chroot/jail.

IMO, it is OK if we only get these benefits on newer versions of BSD.

[briansmith]

So I think dynamically probing for getentropy would make sense, but just using KERN_ARND like the rand crate does will still be fine.

I think it would be good to try to use getentropy if it is available (using weak linkage) and fallback to the /dev/urandom fallback if that default feature is enabled. That's what we'd have to do on macOS, IIUC, and I'd like to minimize the amount of BSD-specific code we have to maintain, since we have so few BSD users.

Remember:

The main drivers here are performance and the ability to work correctly and automatically in a chroot/jail.

IMO, it is OK if we only get these benefits on newer versions of BSD.

[briansmith]

That's what we'd have to do on macOS, IIUC

Oops, I forgot that we already use SecRandomCopyBytes on macOS to avoid this stuff. So, yeah, I agree that your suggestion sounds reasonable.

[briansmith]

That's what we'd have to do on macOS, IIUC

Oops, I forgot that we already use SecRandomCopyBytes on macOS to avoid this stuff. So, yeah, I agree that your suggestion sounds reasonable.