Message265485
| Author | Colm Buckley |
|---|---|
| Recipients | Colm Buckley, doko, lemburg, matejcik, rhettinger, skrah, socketpair, thomas-petazzoni, vstinner |
| Date | 2016-05-13.19:35:12 |
| SpamBayes Score | -1.0 |
| Marked as misclassified | Yes |
| Message-id | <1463168112.82.0.965616713352.issue26839@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| In-reply-to |
| Content | |
|---|---|
See https://lwn.net/Articles/606141/ for an explanation of the blocking behavior of getrandom(). This makes sense to me - before the pool has initialized, /dev/urandom will be readable but will return highly predictable data - ie: it should not be considered safe. In other words, I think that getrandom() offers a sensible API. The only circumstances where we hit the EAGAIN in getrandom() should be when it's called extremely early in the boot process (as is the case for the systemd-cron generator script I mentioned earlier). I think this is safe enough; a more thorough approach would be to flag that the per-process hash seed (_Py_HashSecret) is predictable and shouldn't be used. |
|
| History | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Date | User | Action | Args |
| 2016-05-13 19:35:12 | Colm Buckley | set | recipients: + Colm Buckley, lemburg, rhettinger, doko, vstinner, matejcik, skrah, socketpair, thomas-petazzoni |
| 2016-05-13 19:35:12 | Colm Buckley | set | messageid: <1463168112.82.0.965616713352.issue26839@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| 2016-05-13 19:35:12 | Colm Buckley | link | issue26839 messages |
| 2016-05-13 19:35:12 | Colm Buckley | create | |