Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2007 14:37:56 +0100 From: RW <fbsd06@mlists.homeunix.com> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: /dev/random question Message-ID: <20070917143756.420b7b94@gumby.homeunix.com.> In-Reply-To: <BMEDLGAENEKCJFGODFOCMEGICAAA.tedm@toybox.placo.com> References: <20070916215550.65e09a71@gumby.homeunix.com.> <BMEDLGAENEKCJFGODFOCMEGICAAA.tedm@toybox.placo.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, 17 Sep 2007 02:20:17 -0700 "Ted Mittelstaedt" <tedm@toybox.placo.com> wrote: > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: owner-freebsd-questions@freebsd.org > > [mailto:owner-freebsd-questions@freebsd.org]On 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.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20070917143756.420b7b94>