> If you have to care about security, you shouldn't use the random module
> at all. random.SystemRandom() merely uses a CPRNG as entropy source. But
> It also manipulates numbers in ways that may or may not be safe.

I must respectfully disagree with this. The current docs say:

> Use os.urandom() or SystemRandom if you require a cryptographically
> secure pseudo-random number generator.

That's a pretty strong statement, and IMO it would lead most to believe that SystemRandom along with *all* of its member functions is safe to use for cryptographic purposes[1] (assuming of course that os.urandom() is also a safe CSPRNG).

As a compromise, perhaps SystemRandom could provide its own randrange() with the #9025 fix, while keeping random.randrange() unmodified to preserve the implied same-sequence rule.


[1] I don't mean to imply that this bias bug necessarily is a cryptographic safety issue--it seems unlikely to me that it is one, however not being a cryptographer myself, I'd rather not draw any conclusions either way, and instead I'd prefer to err on the side of safety.