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

Groups > gnu.bash.bug > #14883 > unrolled thread

Re: $RANDOM not Cryptographically secure pseudorandom number generator

Back to article view | Back to gnu.bash.bug

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: $RANDOM not Cryptographically secure pseudorandom number generator Chet Ramey <chet.ramey@case.edu> - 2018-12-03 09:56 -0500

#14883 — Re: $RANDOM not Cryptographically secure pseudorandom number generator

On 12/2/18 6:13 PM, Ole Tange wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 21, 2018 at 11:45 PM Chet Ramey <chet.ramey@case.edu> wrote:
>> On 11/21/18 3:07 PM, Ole Tange wrote:
>>> 'brand' in variables.c is comparable in size to ChaCha20 and ChaCha20
>>> is not completely broken:
>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salsa20
>>>
>>> Could we please replace 'brand' with ChaCha20?
>>
>> What is your application that you need something more complicated than
>> the existing PRNG?
> 
> I do not have that currently, but it seems like a fairly small change
> and it seems odd to have modern software not use modern algorithms.

There has to be a compelling reason to change this, especially at a point
so close to a major release.

You might be expecting too much from bash's random number generator. Is
the problem that its period is at most 2**16? For its intended uses, the
cycle length is acceptable. Do you disagree?

-- 
``The lyf so short, the craft so long to lerne.'' - Chaucer
		 ``Ars longa, vita brevis'' - Hippocrates
Chet Ramey, UTech, CWRU    chet@case.edu    http://tiswww.cwru.edu/~chet/

[toc] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | gnu.bash.bug

csiph-web