Path: csiph.com!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: Multi-channel rand()
Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2018 15:35:50 -0800
Organization: None to speak of
Lines: 16
Message-ID: <lnimzfc149.fsf@kst-u.example.com>
References: <pvrv1d$4ls$1@dont-email.me> <bpNUD.21754$X_3.4267@fx01.am4> <c720a209-9a04-47ab-b9e1-29b1b570231a@googlegroups.com> <6yOUD.36923$Bu5.21082@fx19.iad> <q00el7$k2q$1@dont-email.me> <JMQUD.159236$krL1.133943@fx15.am4>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Injection-Info: reader01.eternal-september.org; posting-host="32ed57ea5d614545634ff390fd99b31b"; logging-data="10873"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+UeD3MHbbBAZ1/kNuTgOze"
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.1 (gnu/linux)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:CWTDgmryqBOAgcVpIeBOO/aJquU= sha1:T+N5SVAPm/+L35w3egOeoI2nCgA=
Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.c:139108

Bart <bc@freeuk.com> writes:
[...]
> Actually C's, rand() doesn't seem too bad.

The standard doesn't specify the algorithm used by rand().  It provides
a sample implementation, but not all implementations use it.  There are
some rand() implementations that are, in some ways, very bad.

rand() can be suitable of some purposes.  It's absolutely not suitable
for cryptographic purposes.

-- 
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) kst@mib.org  <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
Will write code for food.
"We must do something.  This is something.  Therefore, we must do this."
    -- Antony Jay and Jonathan Lynn, "Yes Minister"