Message267808
| Author | christian.heimes |
|---|---|
| Recipients | Colm Buckley, Lukasa, Theodore Tso, alex, christian.heimes, doko, dstufft, larry, lemburg, martin.panter, matejcik, ned.deily, python-dev, rhettinger, skrah, thomas-petazzoni, vstinner, ztane |
| Date | 2016-06-08.08:43:00 |
| SpamBayes Score | -1.0 |
| Marked as misclassified | Yes |
| Message-id | <1465375380.54.0.788536452448.issue26839@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| In-reply-to |
| Content | |
|---|---|
Cory, thanks for summing it up for us. I totally agree with you. In my opinion it is troublesome to have different behavior on platforms. We can implement a workaround for Linux, but not for BSD. Or would O_NONBLOCK cause read() to fail with EWOULDBLOCK on /dev/urandom device? It might be secure enough to use srandom() / random() instead of /dev/urandom in some platforms. It still won't do any good on platforms like Raspberry Pie since the SoC has no RTC. Without a RTC the clock is not set yet. It happens much later in the boot phase when network is available. I don't see a cross-platform solution that is able to handle this super-special case without opening a potential security issue for the majority of users. |
|
| History | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Date | User | Action | Args |
| 2016-06-08 08:43:00 | christian.heimes | set | recipients: + christian.heimes, lemburg, rhettinger, doko, vstinner, larry, matejcik, ned.deily, alex, skrah, python-dev, martin.panter, ztane, dstufft, Lukasa, thomas-petazzoni, Colm Buckley, Theodore Tso |
| 2016-06-08 08:43:00 | christian.heimes | set | messageid: <1465375380.54.0.788536452448.issue26839@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| 2016-06-08 08:43:00 | christian.heimes | link | issue26839 messages |
| 2016-06-08 08:43:00 | christian.heimes | create | |