Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > gnu.bash.bug > #14919 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Eduardo Bustamante <dualbus@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2018-12-15 21:41 -0800 |
| Last post | 2018-12-15 21:41 -0800 |
| Articles | 1 — 1 participant |
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.
Re: $RANDOM not Cryptographically secure pseudorandom number generator Eduardo Bustamante <dualbus@gmail.com> - 2018-12-15 21:41 -0800
| From | Eduardo Bustamante <dualbus@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-12-15 21:41 -0800 |
| Subject | Re: $RANDOM not Cryptographically secure pseudorandom number generator |
| Message-ID | <mailman.5792.1544938905.1284.bug-bash@gnu.org> |
On Sat, Dec 15, 2018 at 6:08 PM Ole Tange <tange@gnu.org> wrote: (...) > But your comment actually emphasizes my point: We _will_ have users > who are naive enough to use $RANDOM in ways you and I would not do, > because we know it is unsafe. > > Let's make those usages a little safer. You know no one is stopping you from submitting a patch to actually fix the documentation right? (or maybe, you know, submitting an actual working patch to change the random generator, not just drop some irrelevant code snippet you got from Wikipedia). > And then we simply wait for Shellshock to happen. Also, comparing this to shellshock is a huge strawman. Please don't do that :), we all know better than that.
Back to top | Article view | gnu.bash.bug
csiph-web