On Mon, 17 Sep 2007 02:20:17 -0700 "Ted Mittelstaedt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > -----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. My point was that Yarrow is a good choice for /dev/urandom but a controversial choice for /dev/random, so it would have been nice to have a choice as to whether /dev/random uses Yarrow or a conventional pool-based implementation. _______________________________________________ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
