Larry Hastings added the comment: I +1 on new functions that are designated the best-practice places to get your pseudo-random numbers.
(IDK if the best place for both is in random; maybe the crypto one should be in secrets?) To be precise: on most OSes what you're calling "crypto random data" is actually "crypto-quality pseudo-random data". Very few platforms provide genuine random data--rather, they seed a CPRNG and give you data from that. (And then the cryptographers have endless arguments about whether the CPRNG is really crypto-safe.) I'm -1 on actually deprecating os.urandom(). It should be left alone, as a thin wrapper around /dev/urandom. I imagine your cryptorandom() and pseudorandom() functions would usually be written in Python and just import and use the appropriate function on a platform-by-platform basis. ---------- nosy: +larry _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue27279> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
