Message267617
| Author | vstinner |
|---|---|
| Recipients | Colm Buckley, doko, larry, lemburg, martin.panter, matejcik, ned.deily, python-dev, rhettinger, skrah, thomas-petazzoni, vstinner, ztane |
| Date | 2016-06-07.10:15:40 |
| SpamBayes Score | -1.0 |
| Marked as misclassified | Yes |
| Message-id | <1465294540.67.0.112026096832.issue26839@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| In-reply-to |
| Content | |
|---|---|
Martin Panter (msg267511): "Maybe an alternative would be to add a special PYTHONHASHSEED=best-effort (or whatever) value that says if there is no entropy available, use a predictable hash seed. That would force whoever starts the Python process to be aware of the problem." In my experience, it's better if users don't touch security :-) It's better if Python simply makes the best choices regarding to security. |
|
| History | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Date | User | Action | Args |
| 2016-06-07 10:15:40 | vstinner | set | recipients: + vstinner, lemburg, rhettinger, doko, larry, matejcik, ned.deily, skrah, python-dev, martin.panter, ztane, thomas-petazzoni, Colm Buckley |
| 2016-06-07 10:15:40 | vstinner | set | messageid: <1465294540.67.0.112026096832.issue26839@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| 2016-06-07 10:15:40 | vstinner | link | issue26839 messages |
| 2016-06-07 10:15:40 | vstinner | create | |