Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > comp.lang.python > #7212

Re: How good is security via hashing

Path csiph.com!x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net!usenet.pasdenom.info!gegeweb.org!de-l.enfer-du-nord.net!feeder1.enfer-du-nord.net!feeds.phibee-telecom.net!newsfeed.xs4all.nl!newsfeed6.news.xs4all.nl!xs4all!post.news.xs4all.nl!not-for-mail
Return-Path <debatem1@gmail.com>
X-Original-To python-list@python.org
Delivered-To python-list@mail.python.org
X-Spam-Status OK 0.086
X-Spam-Evidence '*H*': 0.83; '*S*': 0.00; 'deprecated': 0.09; 'pm,': 0.10; 'wrote:': 0.14; '7:30': 0.16; 'iirc': 0.16; 'subject:security': 0.16; '\xa0do': 0.16; 'why.': 0.16; 'cc:addr :python-list': 0.17; 'tue,': 0.17; 'writes:': 0.19; 'header:In- Reply-To:1': 0.21; 'seems': 0.21; 'cc:2**0': 0.22; 'cc:no real name:2**0': 0.23; 'runs': 0.23; 'windows': 0.26; 'message- id:@mail.gmail.com': 0.28; 'paul': 0.28; 'random': 0.28; 'bit': 0.30; 'subject:How': 0.30; 'cc:addr:python.org': 0.30; 'do.': 0.30; 'this.': 0.31; 'received:209.85.212': 0.34; 'numbers.': 0.35; 'uses': 0.36; 'running': 0.37; 'too.': 0.37; 'received:google.com': 0.37; 'received:209.85': 0.37; 'note,': 0.37; 'thread': 0.37; 'page': 0.37; 'but': 0.38; 'strong': 0.38; 'subject:: ': 0.38; 'received:209': 0.39; 'christian': 0.39; 'got': 0.39; 'goes': 0.39; 'possibility': 0.40; 'help': 0.40; 'generate': 0.60; 'bitten': 0.84; 'generator,': 0.84; 'machines,': 0.84; 'received:209.85.212.178': 0.91; 'received:mail- px0-f178.google.com': 0.91; 'to:none': 0.93; 'quality.': 0.93; 'subject:good': 0.93
DKIM-Signature v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=1yAiAGAAcKQ9YZjgchpEGFMbzxBzmnjnZJxvIqxWTjk=; b=UW5rc/4jKkGScO7Ro/Ce3MVnjHGOkrUE1mS57zdnKpHbxS8COLw9LyRvFDlWGF2GPR V7tTNGWAcuN0UXYQiEXiDyUe+ZatQpjSMPlf8zreUi0vLXuel207xinxgduXfGUVI2H4 dmOCkw2vOmcMCBhYPI4ol7z/tTvOwMUeVGJuA=
DomainKey-Signature a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:cc :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=jnHzDvsdPQ5lRzs2Ub7nb/108X3DEv3Bg8nu3lXMCxDb2ruEIzG4lvmiLMdJeU6jln 9UAurgl9kubwj46aWby8w2emXNJJr1Xs7OJ0rx6eDQEfi8ReJCmD/fkLkchxl/C1M1ae 3G8fHFG5Y5u3AjA72DIfibxTTTHzRR0RpHuJw=
MIME-Version 1.0
In-Reply-To <7x39jl6on1.fsf@ruckus.brouhaha.com>
References <4DEDFAEB.4050006@chamonix.reportlab.co.uk> <BANLkTinRJpe6zQ5EYVYXxjfc+ue=Gh-4JA@mail.gmail.com> <4DEE0CF9.6020508@chamonix.reportlab.co.uk> <islqg5$1eq$1@dough.gmane.org> <mailman.8.1307484500.11593.python-list@python.org> <7x39jl6on1.fsf@ruckus.brouhaha.com>
Date Tue, 7 Jun 2011 22:25:12 -0700
Subject Re: How good is security via hashing
From geremy condra <debatem1@gmail.com>
Cc python-list@python.org
Content-Type text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding quoted-printable
X-BeenThere python-list@python.org
X-Mailman-Version 2.1.12
Precedence list
List-Id General discussion list for the Python programming language <python-list.python.org>
List-Unsubscribe <http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-list>, <mailto:python-list-request@python.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-list>
List-Post <mailto:python-list@python.org>
List-Help <mailto:python-list-request@python.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe <http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list>, <mailto:python-list-request@python.org?subject=subscribe>
Newsgroups comp.lang.python
Message-ID <mailman.16.1307510716.11593.python-list@python.org> (permalink)
Lines 24
NNTP-Posting-Host 82.94.164.166
X-Trace 1307510716 news.xs4all.nl 49179 [::ffff:82.94.164.166]:46770
X-Complaints-To abuse@xs4all.nl
Xref x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net comp.lang.python:7212

Show key headers only | View raw


On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 7:30 PM, Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> Christian Heimes <lists@cheimes.de> writes:
>> PyCrypto has a strong pseudorandom number generator, too.
>
> If you mean the one at pycrypto.org, that page now says:
>
>    Random number generation
>
>    Do not use RandomPool to generate random numbers. Use Crypto.Random
>    instead. RandomPool is deprecated and will be removed in a future
>    release. See this thread to find out why.

On a related note, keyczar just got bitten by this.

> Crypto.Random just uses system randomness, which is the right thing to
> do.  It then goes and runs them through a distiller (Fortuna), which
> seems a little bit silly to me, but harmless.

IIRC this is mostly to help deal with the possibility of running on
older Windows machines, where the cryptographic random number service
was of very poor quality.

Geremy Condra

Back to comp.lang.python | Previous | NextPrevious in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread


Thread

Re: How good is security via hashing Christian Heimes <lists@cheimes.de> - 2011-06-08 00:08 +0200
  Re: How good is security via hashing Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2011-06-07 19:30 -0700
    Re: How good is security via hashing geremy condra <debatem1@gmail.com> - 2011-06-07 22:25 -0700

csiph-web