[Python-Dev] BDFL ruling request: should we block forever waiting for high-quality random bits?
Nikolaus Rath
Nikolaus at rath.org
Thu Jun 9 23:50:45 EDT 2016
More information about the Python-Dev mailing list
Thu Jun 9 23:50:45 EDT 2016
- Previous message (by thread): [Python-Dev] BDFL ruling request: should we block forever waiting for high-quality random bits?
- Next message (by thread): [Python-Dev] BDFL ruling request: should we block forever waiting for high-quality random bits?
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On Jun 09 2016, Larry Hastings <larry at hastings.org> wrote: > On 06/09/2016 07:38 PM, Nikolaus Rath wrote: >> On Jun 09 2016, Larry Hastings <larry at hastings.org> wrote: >>> Nope, I want the old behavior back. os.urandom() should read >>> /dev/random if getrandom() would block. As the British say, "it >>> should do what it says on the tin". >> Aeh, what the tin says is "return random bytes". > > What the tin says is "urandom", which has local man pages that dictate > exactly how it behaves. [...] I disagree. The authoritative source for the behavior of the Python 'urandom' function is the Python documentation, not the Linux manpage for the "urandom" device. And https://docs.python.org/3.4/library/os.html says first and foremost: os.urandom(n)¶ Return a string of n random bytes suitable for cryptographic use. Best, -Nikolaus -- GPG encrypted emails preferred. Key id: 0xD113FCAC3C4E599F Fingerprint: ED31 791B 2C5C 1613 AF38 8B8A D113 FCAC 3C4E 599F »Time flies like an arrow, fruit flies like a Banana.«
- Previous message (by thread): [Python-Dev] BDFL ruling request: should we block forever waiting for high-quality random bits?
- Next message (by thread): [Python-Dev] BDFL ruling request: should we block forever waiting for high-quality random bits?
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Python-Dev mailing list