|
|
Subscribe / Log in / New account

A security review of three NTP implementations

A security review of three NTP implementations

Posted Oct 2, 2017 2:24 UTC (Mon) by fest3er (guest, #60379)
In reply to: A security review of three NTP implementations by zblaxell
Parent article: A security review of three NTP implementations


to post comments

A security review of three NTP implementations

Posted Oct 2, 2017 4:48 UTC (Mon) by zblaxell (subscriber, #26385) [Link]

Thanks! I somehow missed that in a forest of not-quite-relevant links.

So TL;DR Chrony has no broadcast/multicast, Autokey, or symmetric ephemeral modes (and at least two of those you don't want anyway). There's different NTP clock driver architecture (clock drivers talk to the server through a socket instead of being built into the server). The query interface is different, both on the network (separate port for queries) and admin tools (but not difficult to adapt--I flipped a couple of servers since reading the parent article).

OTOH Chrony boasts better statistical filters (which compensate for the lack of a clustering algorithm?), better power-saving behavior, better DNS pool behavior, and better tolerance for assorted network problems compared to ntpd and openntpd.


Copyright © 2025, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds