[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       busybox
Subject:    comment on  getrandom (was getrandom: new applet)
From:       walter harms <wharms () bfs ! de>
Date:       2016-07-03 19:43:46
Message-ID: 57796AF2.6050000 () bfs ! de
[Download RAW message or body]



Am 03.07.2016 18:46, schrieb Denys Vlasenko:
> On Tue, Jun 28, 2016 at 7:47 PM, walter harms <wharms@bfs.de> wrote:
>> perhaps a better aim ist to improve the $RANDOM in ash ?
> 
> 
> $RAMDOM generator in my tests passed all "dieharder -g 200 -a" tests.
> How much better than this do you need?
> 

Just for you understanding: I do not need a better $RANDOM, we are aware of
the current short comings but for us that is ok in the moment.

But according to this article https://lwn.net/Articles/606141/
The idea behind getrandom() is to provide a safer way to get a random variable
by providing a syscall instead relying on a device that may not be available.
(plus block/unblock feature).

So far i understand the idea behind the getrandom() programm is to way for
I can imaging that for practical application it would be ok if they check
for an environment variable like $getrandom (real rand) that uses the features
of getrandom.

re,
 wh

i do not want it my gut feeling made me do it ...

_______________________________________________
busybox mailing list
busybox@busybox.net
http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/busybox
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]