[Python-Dev] BDFL ruling request: should we block forever waiting for high-quality random bits?
Random832
random832 at fastmail.com
Fri Jun 10 17:14:50 EDT 2016
More information about the Python-Dev mailing list
Fri Jun 10 17:14:50 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 Fri, Jun 10, 2016, at 15:54, Theodore Ts'o wrote: > So even on Python pre-3.5.0, realistically speaking, the "weakness" of > os.random would only be an issue (a) if it is run within the first few > seconds of boot, and (b) os.random is used to directly generate a > long-term cryptographic secret. If you are fork openssl or ssh-keygen > to generate a public/private keypair, then you aren't using os.random. So, I have a question. If this "weakness" in /dev/urandom is so unimportant to 99% of situations... why isn't there a flag that can be passed to getrandom() to allow the same behavior?
- 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