In a WhisperBack bug report, someone suggested to remove ekeyd from Tails
Tails automatically starts up ekeyd, the Entropy Key Daemon, which looks for any attached Entropy Key device and uses it as a source of randomness for the kernel. This is all well and good, except for one fact: no one uses Entropy Key. Not only is it rare, but it's been out of stock for a very long time, and unlikely to come back soon. There are far more popular external TRNGs out there, many of which have their own daemons. That makes you think, why should Tails have an extra daemon running as root, who's purpose is to mess with the kernel entropy pool, if it's so seldom ever used? All it takes is an attacker to find a bug that allows them to fill the entropy pool with bogus data, which isn't unlikely when ekeyd has /dev/random open for writing constantly and constantly keeps looking for an Entropy Key.
Please remove ekeyd. It's unneccessary and its presence just increases the attack surface area of Tails.
#5 Updated by sajolida over 3 years ago
- Status changed from Rejected to Confirmed
- Type of work changed from Research to Discuss
Given #11703, let's reopen this ticket :)
According to archive.org Entropy Keys have been out of stock since March 2013: https://web.archive.org/web/20130330233729/http://www.entropykey.co.uk/shop/.
And according to tracker.debian.org the upstream code is not available anymore: https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/ekeyd.
Still, according to popcon, the package is still installed frequently: https://qa.debian.org/popcon.php?package=ekeyd.
Maybe it's time to reconsider removing ekeyd and suggest people who still have entropy keys to install it using Additional Software Packages? This might not work for people using Entropy Key on air-gapped machines (but how many people would that be...) Or shall we wait some more? If so, until when?
As a first step, should we disable the daemon by default, as suggested in #11703, and ask people to complain if they miss it.
#7 Updated by intrigeri over 3 years ago
I support removing ekeyd, on the grounds that it's unmaintained, very rarely used, poorly designed, and security sensitive. Given how it's (not) maintained, I bet that it'll bitrot, and sooner or later it'll be removed from Debian testing anyway.
(Nitpicking starts here ;)
But I'd rather not build this decision on top of some of the other suggested arguments, that could set precedents I'm not comfortable with:
- We go to great lengths to support various hardware, including some that's been out of stock since quite before 2013, and to do that we often accommodate ourselves of some, or all, of the drawbacks ekeyd suffers from (e.g. we ship binary firmware blobs and all kinds of mostly obsolete driver code that runs as root, when not in kernel space. By nature, these pieces of code are very dangerous, but pragmatically we have to live with it). I guess we can easily agree that we should try to support hardware even if it's 4 years old, even if this implies to ship this kind of code.
- Let's not get used to suggest Additional Software Package for hardware support, especially hardware that's particularly useful for air-gapped systems.
#9 Updated by sajolida over 3 years ago
- Subject changed from Consider removing ekeyd to Remove ekeyd
- Type of work changed from Discuss to Code
Ok, so the rationale is that we support old hardware as long as the corresponding software is well maintained. Or actually, we include software as long as it is mainained (indenpendently of the corresponding hardware).
Mangling this ticket accordingly then.
#11 Updated by intrigeri over 3 years ago
Or maybe intrigeri feels like this needs more discussion since he didn't close #11703...
No, that's fine, let's proceed! I did not close #11703 because I preferred us to decide something here first (and if for some reason we had decided to keep ekeyd, then we could have discussed the option suggested by #11703).