> -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of RW > Sent: Sunday, September 16, 2007 1:56 PM > To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org > Subject: Re: /dev/random question > > > That's a poor analogy because they haven't improved /dev/random so it > doesn't block, they've taken a /dev/urandom implementation and renamed > it. In terms of your analogy they've blocked off the road, diverted > everyone onto the highway, and renamed it to main street. > > Using Yarrow for /dev/random is not an intrinsically bad idea, but it > is controversial.
I really don't see what the issue is here. If you really want a /dev/urandom on your system then fine - symlink /dev/random to /dev/urandom and be done with it. Historically on UNIXes, /dev/urandom has been LESS random than /dev/random. In short, it forced the application developer to make a tradeoff - if they needed a lot of random numbers quickly, they had to be content with the stream of numbers being less random. Where you often saw this is in game programming - and less-random inputs to games made them predictable, and thus, not as fun to play. With crypto apps, they just made those apps run -slower- as the app waited for the random device to give it randomness. if you really want a source that is kind of random but really isn't then use the rand library call which doesen't use yarrow. And as for using Yarrow for /dev/random, well the /dev/random device uses the hardware random generator on the VIA C3 Nehemiah (stepping 3 or greater) CPU, not Yarrow, if such a CPU is present. For those that think Yarrow is controversal then fine - add in support for the hardware random generator of your favorite processor (most have one now) and quit complaining. Ted _______________________________________________ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
