Re: How good is security via hashing

From	Christian Heimes <lists@cheimes.de>
Subject	Re: How good is security via hashing
Date	2011-06-08 00:08 +0200
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>
Newsgroups	comp.lang.python
Message-ID	<mailman.8.1307484500.11593.python-list@python.org> (permalink)

Show all headers | View raw

Am 07.06.2011 20:26, schrieb Terry Reedy:
> On 6/7/2011 7:35 AM, Robin Becker wrote:
> 
>> I guess what I'm asking is whether any sequence that's using random to
>> generate random numbers is predictable if enough samples are drawn.
> 
> Apparently so. random.random is *not* 'cryptographically secure'.
> https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Cryptographically_secure_pseudorandom_number_generator
> 
> One of Python's crypto wrapper modules (sorry, forget which one) was 
> recently modified to expose the crypto rng functions in the wrapped C 
> library. It should be mentioned in What New for 3.3. You might be able 
> to get at the same functions with ctypes.

PyCrypto has a strong pseudorandom number generator, too.

Back to comp.lang.python | Previous | Next — Next 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