We rec'd a signed License Agreement from Aaron D Gifford
for his SHA-256/384/512 secure hash alg's, which
are used in Ben's proposed PRNG code.
Joe Orton wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 02, 2003 at 05:16:13AM +, Ben Laurie wrote:
>
>>Joe Orton wrote:
>>
>>>How will this be used to replace the apr_generate_random_bytes
>>>interface, or is this just to be used to implement a daemon accessed via
>>>the EGD interface (or something like that)?
>>
>>
On Sun, Nov 02, 2003 at 05:16:13AM +, Ben Laurie wrote:
> Joe Orton wrote:
> > How will this be used to replace the apr_generate_random_bytes
> > interface, or is this just to be used to implement a daemon accessed via
> > the EGD interface (or something like that)?
>
> The latter is the gener
Joe Orton wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 30, 2003 at 03:52:41PM +, Ben Laurie wrote:
>
>>Ben Laurie wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Comments?
>>>
>>>Note that this supplies the underlying PRNG - I anticipate wrapping it
>>>up in a daemon for normal use.
Bill Stoddard wrote:
> Ben Laurie wrote:
>
>> Bill Stoddard wrote:
>>
>>> Does Aaron Gifford have the rights to all the code submitted under his
>>> copyright?
>>
>> I have no idea. Feel free to ask.
>
> Since you are an APR PMC member and are about to commit the code to an
> APR repository, isn
On Thu, Oct 30, 2003 at 03:52:41PM +, Ben Laurie wrote:
> Ben Laurie wrote:
>
> > Comments?
> >
> > Note that this supplies the underlying PRNG - I anticipate wrapping it
> > up in a daemon for normal use. As discussed with some members of the
> > team, w
Ben Laurie wrote:
Bill Stoddard wrote:
Does Aaron Gifford have the rights to all the code submitted under his
copyright?
I have no idea. Feel free to ask.
Since you are an APR PMC member and are about to commit the code to an
APR repository, isn't the task of vetting the code your responsibility?
Bill Stoddard wrote:
> Does Aaron Gifford have the rights to all the code submitted under his
> copyright?
I have no idea. Feel free to ask.
Cheers,
Ben.
--
http://www.apache-ssl.org/ben.html http://www.thebunker.net/
"There is no limit to what a man can do or how far he can go if he
do
Does Aaron Gifford have the rights to all the code submitted under his
copyright?
Bill
David Reid wrote:
>
> +1 - commit that sucker :)
>
> Once it's in the tree then we can look at the thread safe issues :)
>
Agreed. :)
--
===
Jim Jagielski [|] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [|] http://www.jaguNET.com/
> From: David Reid [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Friday, October 31, 2003 11:58 AM
> +1 - commit that sucker :)
>
> Once it's in the tree then we can look at the thread safe issues :)
Very true. And bottom line, I don't understand how a
PRNG works, and in short the
+1 - commit that sucker :)
Once it's in the tree then we can look at the thread safe issues :)
david
> Ben Laurie wrote:
>
> > Comments?
> >
> > Note that this supplies the underlying PRNG - I anticipate wrapping it
> > up in a daemon for normal use. As
Ben Laurie wrote:
> Comments?
>
> Note that this supplies the underlying PRNG - I anticipate wrapping it
> up in a daemon for normal use. As discussed with some members of the
> team, we think that should be a sub-project of APR, apr-prngd.
>
> Note that for some applicati
> From: Ben Laurie [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, October 30, 2003 2:20 PM
> Comments?
Where's the patch?
> Note that this supplies the underlying PRNG - I anticipate wrapping it
> up in a daemon for normal use. As discussed with some members of the
> team,
Comments?
Note that this supplies the underlying PRNG - I anticipate wrapping it
up in a daemon for normal use. As discussed with some members of the
team, we think that should be a sub-project of APR, apr-prngd.
Note that for some applications, direct access to the PRNG makes sense.
Also note
Ben Laurie wrote:
>
> It has been suggested that I should make my new PRNG (as yet unwritten)
> a part of APR, since the original motivation was to fix the UUID
> problems in APR.
>
> I'm more than happy to do that, it seems like the best way to get the
> cross-platfor
Ben Laurie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> It has been suggested that I should make my new PRNG (as yet unwritten)
> a part of APR, since the original motivation was to fix the UUID
> problems in APR.
>
> I'm more than happy to do that, it seems like the best way t
Jeff Trawick wrote:
> Ben Laurie wrote:
>
>> It has been suggested that I should make my new PRNG (as yet unwritten)
>> a part of APR, since the original motivation was to fix the UUID
>> problems in APR.
>
>
> If it serves as a general solution for all APR req
Ben Laurie wrote:
It has been suggested that I should make my new PRNG (as yet unwritten)
a part of APR, since the original motivation was to fix the UUID
problems in APR.
If it serves as a general solution for all APR requirements (to be used
always if no /dev/*random), it sounds like a good
> From: Ben Laurie [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Friday, May 16, 2003 3:57 PM
> It has been suggested that I should make my new PRNG (as yet unwritten)
> a part of APR, since the original motivation was to fix the UUID
> problems in APR.
>
> I'm more than happy to
Ben Laurie wrote:
It has been suggested that I should make my new PRNG (as yet unwritten)
a part of APR, since the original motivation was to fix the UUID
problems in APR.
I'm more than happy to do that, it seems like the best way to get the
cross-platform support it needs, and it does
It has been suggested that I should make my new PRNG (as yet unwritten)
a part of APR, since the original motivation was to fix the UUID
problems in APR.
I'm more than happy to do that, it seems like the best way to get the
cross-platform support it needs, and it does mean there'
This was posted by Tom Lane on the Postgresql [patches] list, which I
thought might be of interest :)
The thing that sticks in my craw about OpenSSL's approach to this is
that they assume application programmers (or database interface library
programmers, in this case) know more about how to find
ake sense to do some research into PRNGs and use
> that as a basis instead of truerand.c? Or, is there some
> worthwhile aspect of truerand.c that merits our use of it?
> Does anyone have any other C implementations (under a suitable
> license) that would be good to use? I'm not
use? I'm not sure how good a PRNG
we need. I'm betting there are some piss-poor /dev/random
implementations out there anyway. -- justin
25 matches
Mail list logo
