arc4random(3bsd) | 3bsd | arc4random(3bsd) |
arc4random
,
arc4random_uniform
,
arc4random_buf
,
arc4random_stir
,
arc4random_addrandom
—
random number generator
library “libbsd”
#include
<stdlib.h>
(See
libbsd(7) for include usage.)
uint32_t
arc4random
(void);
uint32_t
arc4random_uniform
(uint32_t
bound);
void
arc4random_buf
(void
*buf, size_t
len);
void
arc4random_stir
(void);
void
arc4random_addrandom
(unsigned
char *buf, int
len);
The arc4random
family of functions
provides a cryptographic pseudorandom number generator automatically seeded
from the system entropy pool and safe to use from multiple threads.
arc4random
is designed to prevent an adversary from
guessing outputs, unlike rand(3) and
random(3), and is faster and more
convenient than reading from /dev/urandom
directly.
arc4random
()
returns an integer in [0, 2^32) chosen independently with uniform
distribution.
arc4random_uniform
()
returns an integer in [0, bound) chosen independently
with uniform distribution.
arc4random_buf
()
stores len bytes into the memory pointed to by
buf, each byte chosen independently from [0, 256) with
uniform distribution.
arc4random_stir
()
draws entropy from the operating system and incorporates it into the
library's PRNG state to influence future outputs.
arc4random_addrandom
()
incorporates len bytes, which must be nonnegative,
from the buffer buf, into the library's PRNG state to
influence future outputs.
It is not necessary for an application to
call
arc4random_stir
()
or arc4random_addrandom
() before calling other
arc4random
functions. The first call to any
arc4random
function will initialize the PRNG state
unpredictably from the system entropy pool.
The arc4random
functions provide the
following security properties against three different classes of attackers,
assuming enough entropy is provided by the operating system:
arc4random
functions cannot predict past or future
unseen outputs.One ‘output’ means the result of any single request
to an arc4random
function, no matter how short it
is.
The second property is sometimes called ‘forward secrecy’, ‘backtracking resistance’, or ‘key erasure after each output’.
The arc4random
functions are currently
implemented using the ChaCha20 pseudorandom function family. For any 32-byte
string s, ChaCha20_s is a
function from 16-byte strings to 64-byte strings. It is conjectured that if
s is chosen with uniform distribution, then the
distribution on ChaCha20_s is indistinguishable to a
computationally bounded adversary from a uniform distribution on all
functions from 16-byte strings to 64-byte strings.
The PRNG state is a 32-byte ChaCha20 key s.
Each request to an arc4random
function
arc4random
() yields the first four bytes
of k as output directly.
arc4random_buf
() either yields up to 32 bytes of
k as output directly, or, for longer requests, uses
k as a ChaCha20 key and yields the concatenation
ChaCha20_k(0) || ChaCha20_k(1)
|| ... as output. arc4random_uniform
() repeats
arc4random
() until it obtains an integer in [2^32 %
bound, 2^32), and reduces that modulo
bound.
The PRNG state is per-thread, unless memory allocation fails
inside the library, in which case some threads may share global PRNG state
with a mutex. The global PRNG state is zeroed on fork in the parent via
pthread_atfork(3), and the
per-thread PRNG state is zeroed on fork in the child via
minherit(2) with
MAP_INHERIT_ZERO
, so that the child cannot reuse or
see the parent's PRNG state. The PRNG state is reseeded automatically from
the system entropy pool on the first use of an
arc4random
function after zeroing.
The first use of an arc4random
function
may abort the process in the highly unlikely event that library
initialization necessary to implement the security model fails.
Additionally, arc4random_stir
() and
arc4random_addrandom
() may abort the process in the
highly unlikely event that the operating system fails to provide
entropy.
rand(3), random(3), rnd(4), cprng(9)
Daniel J. Bernstein, ChaCha, a variant of Salsa20, http://cr.yp.to/papers.html#chacha, 2008-01-28, Document ID: 4027b5256e17b9796842e6d0f68b0b5e.
These functions first appeared in OpenBSD
2.1, FreeBSD 3.0, NetBSD
1.6, and DragonFly 1.0. The functions
arc4random
(),
arc4random_buf
() and
arc4random_uniform
() appeared in glibc 2.36.
There is no way to get deterministic, reproducible results out of
arc4random
for testing purposes.
The name ‘arc4random’ was chosen for hysterical raisins -- it was originally implemented using the RC4 stream cipher, which has been known since shortly after it was published in 1994 to have observable biases in the output, and is now known to be broken badly enough to admit practical attacks in the real world. Unfortunately, the library found widespread adoption and the name stuck before anyone recognized that it was silly.
The signature of arc4random_addrandom
() is
silly. There is no reason to require casts or accept negative lengths: it
should take a void * buffer and a
size_t length. But it's too late to change that
now.
arc4random_uniform
() does not help to
choose integers in [0, n) uniformly at random when
n > 2^32.
The security model of arc4random
is
stronger than many applications need, and stronger than other operating
systems provide. For example, applications encrypting messages with random,
but not secret, initialization vectors need only prevent an adversary from
guessing future outputs, since past outputs will have been published
already.
On the one hand, arc4random
could be
marginally faster if it were not necessary to prevent an adversary who sees
the state from predicting past outputs. On the other hand, there are
applications in the wild that use arc4random
to
generate key material, such as OpenSSH, so for the sake of
NetBSD users it would be imprudent to weaken the
security model. On the third hand, relying on the security model of
arc4random
in NetBSD may
lead you to an unpleasant surprise on another operating system whose
implementation of arc4random
has a weaker security
model.
One may be tempted to create new APIs to accommodate different security models and performance constraints without unpleasant surprises on different operating systems. This should not be done lightly, though, because there are already too many different choices, and too many opportunities for programmers to reach for one and pick the wrong one.
November 16, 2014 | x86_64 |