On Fri, 1 Oct 2010, Ted Unangst wrote:

> nobody should really be using srandom, but we provide it and it's a 
> tempting target, so they do.  let's give them arandom instead.  they'll 
> never know the difference, except it may actually work.  :)

I don't like this. If I was generating a particularly high-value key
(e.g. a long-lived root CA key) then I'd want to use srandom since it
avoids the weakness of an insufficiently-keyed PRNG.

I'd have no objection to making /dev/srandom mode 0640 though.

If anything should go, it should be /dev/random and /dev/urandom. 

-d

Reply via email to