Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:87173
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain icloud.com designates 17.158.42.246 as permitted sender)
Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
MIME-version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.2 \(2098\))
In-reply-to:
 <CALYT1Yo-ae+cemXaaXs5Jv5t2DSzdxdYuxuhEGbXyoo_863+bw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 14 Jul 2015 23:10:41 +0200
Cc: PHP Internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable
Message-ID: <1179E626-A5F9-483E-9088-096C4FC46214@icloud.com>
References: <CALYT1Yo-ae+cemXaaXs5Jv5t2DSzdxdYuxuhEGbXyoo_863+bw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Sammy Kaye Powers <me@sammyk.me>
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Core functions throwing exceptions in PHP7
From: dean.eigenmann@icloud.com (Dean Eigenmann)

Would a PHP Error not work in this case? Or would the error then be =
interpreted as the result?


> On 14 Jul 2015, at 23:04, Sammy Kaye Powers <me@sammyk.me> wrote:
>=20
> Hello lovely PHP nerds,
>=20
> There are two open PR's for PHP7 to modify the behavior of the =
CSPRNG's:
>=20
> https://github.com/php/php-src/pull/1397 (main discussion)
> https://github.com/php/php-src/pull/1398
>=20
> Currently the random_*() functions will issue a warning and return =
false if
> a good source of random cannot be found. This is a potential security =
hole
> in the event the RNG fails and returns false which gets evaluated as 0 =
in a
> cryptographic context.
>=20
> To prevent this exploit the proposed behavior will throw an Exception =
when
> the RNG fails or certain argument validation fails. This also gives =
the
> developer a graceful way to fall back to an alternate CSPRNG.
>=20
> Since the core functions in PHP don't throw Exceptions, there is =
debate on
> whether or not this change should be implemented. Some say the =
CSPRNG's
> should get a special pass since they will be relied on for =
cryptography. If
> we can't throw Exceptions, there were suggestions of raising a fatal =
error
> if the RNG fails.
>=20
> I think the argument can be boiled down to consistency vs security. =
We'd
> love to hear your feedback to decide what we should do in this =
context. :)
>=20
> Thanks,
> Sammy Kaye Powers
> sammyk.me
>=20
> Chicago, IL 60604