From owner-freebsd-current  Sun Feb  2 11: 7:59 2003
Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 023AD37B401; Sun,  2 Feb 2003 11:07:58 -0800 (PST)
Received: from agamemnon.cnchost.com (agamemnon.cnchost.com [207.155.252.31])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 9E97743F79; Sun,  2 Feb 2003 11:07:57 -0800 (PST)
	(envelope-from bakul@bitblocks.com)
Received: from bitblocks.com (adsl-209-204-185-216.sonic.net [209.204.185.216])
	by agamemnon.cnchost.com
	id OAA04015; Sun, 2 Feb 2003 14:07:51 -0500 (EST)
	[ConcentricHost SMTP Relay 1.15]
Message-ID: <200302021907.OAA04015@agamemnon.cnchost.com>
To: phk@FreeBSD.ORG
Cc: "Andrey A. Chernov" <ache@nagual.pp.ru>,
	Mark Murray <mark@grondar.org>, Doug Barton <DougB@FreeBSD.ORG>,
	Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org>, current@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject: Re: rand() is broken 
In-reply-to: Your message of "Sun, 02 Feb 2003 19:43:44 +0100."
             <31532.1044211424@critter.freebsd.dk> 
Date: Sun, 02 Feb 2003 11:07:51 -0800
From: Bakul Shah <bakul@bitblocks.com>
Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
List-ID: <freebsd-current.FreeBSD.ORG>
List-Archive: <http://docs.freebsd.org/mail/> (Web Archive)
List-Help: <mailto:majordomo@FreeBSD.ORG?subject=help> (List Instructions)
List-Subscribe: <mailto:majordomo@FreeBSD.ORG?subject=subscribe%20freebsd-current>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:majordomo@FreeBSD.ORG?subject=unsubscribe%20freebsd-current>
X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG

> As I said, I don't know how big a concern this is.  But last time
> it was enough of a concern to make us keep rand() as it was.

[I know you are talking about rand() but Mark Murray's
earlier email about wanting to re-implement random() really
concerned me so I want to make sure my point gets across]

Not changing random() was of real concern to me when I was
doing chip simulations.  ASIC design verification folks won't
be happy if the rug is pulled out from under them.  In
general crypto and simulation needs are different and I don't
trust the crypto guys to look out for the simulation guys!

I don't care any more if rand() is changed but _please_ leave
random() alone!  And it would be nice to indicate *why* in
the source code for the next time this discussion comes up.

Thanks!

-- bakul

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message