Message265549
| Author | vstinner |
|---|---|
| Recipients | Colm Buckley, doko, lemburg, matejcik, rhettinger, socketpair, thomas-petazzoni, vstinner |
| Date | 2016-05-14.22:49:20 |
| SpamBayes Score | -1.0 |
| Marked as misclassified | Yes |
| Message-id | <1463266160.59.0.47565241417.issue26839@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| In-reply-to |
| Content | |
|---|---|
getrandom-nonblocking-v2.patch: + /* Alternative might be to return all-zeroes as a strong + * signal that these are not random data. */ I don't understand why you propose that in a comment of your change. I don't recall that this idea was proposed or discussed here. IMHO it's a very bad idea to fill the buffer with zeros, the caller simply has no idea how to check the quality of the entropy. A buffer filled with zeros is "possible" even with high quality RNG, but it's really very very rare :-) If you consider that a strong signal is required, you must raise an exception. But it looks like users don't care of the quality of the RNG, they request that Python "just works". |
|
| History | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Date | User | Action | Args |
| 2016-05-14 22:49:20 | vstinner | set | recipients: + vstinner, lemburg, rhettinger, doko, matejcik, socketpair, thomas-petazzoni, Colm Buckley |
| 2016-05-14 22:49:20 | vstinner | set | messageid: <1463266160.59.0.47565241417.issue26839@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| 2016-05-14 22:49:20 | vstinner | link | issue26839 messages |
| 2016-05-14 22:49:20 | vstinner | create | |