Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:94383 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 74205 invoked from network); 5 Jul 2016 04:02:28 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 5 Jul 2016 04:02:28 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=yohgaki@ohgaki.net; sender-id=pass Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=yohgaki@ohgaki.net; spf=pass; sender-id=pass Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain ohgaki.net designates 180.42.98.130 as permitted sender) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: yohgaki@ohgaki.net X-Host-Fingerprint: 180.42.98.130 ns1.es-i.jp Received: from [180.42.98.130] ([180.42.98.130:55838] helo=es-i.jp) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id FE/45-30328-3513B775 for ; Tue, 05 Jul 2016 00:02:28 -0400 Received: (qmail 54612 invoked by uid 89); 5 Jul 2016 04:02:24 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail-qt0-f182.google.com) (yohgaki@ohgaki.net@209.85.216.182) by 0 with ESMTPA; 5 Jul 2016 04:02:24 -0000 Received: by mail-qt0-f182.google.com with SMTP id m2so95535819qtd.1 for ; Mon, 04 Jul 2016 21:02:23 -0700 (PDT) X-Gm-Message-State: ALyK8tImEZPrg+lCs/aP4dKLlCfpHEtQPKCLh18l8bR+KY9BryfgzUmga6p9HwpBsGKZmXz73aehHiztdvOnZA== X-Received: by 10.200.33.172 with SMTP id 41mr23862277qty.26.1467691337742; Mon, 04 Jul 2016 21:02:17 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.140.17.33 with HTTP; Mon, 4 Jul 2016 21:01:38 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Tue, 5 Jul 2016 13:01:38 +0900 X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: Message-ID: To: "internals@lists.php.net" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Subject: Re: [RFC][VOTE] Session ID without hashing From: yohgaki@ohgaki.net (Yasuo Ohgaki) Hi all, On Sat, Jul 2, 2016 at 4:35 PM, Yasuo Ohgaki wrote: > Currently session module uses obsolete MD5 for session ID. With > CSPRNG, hashing is redundant and needless. It adds hash module > dependency and inefficient (There is no reason to use hash for CSPRNG > generated bytes). > > This proposal cleans up session code by removing hash. > > https://wiki.php.net/rfc/session-id-without-hashing > > I set vote requires 2/3 support. > Please describe the reason why when you against this RFC. Reasons are > important for improvements! > > Thank you! Some of us worried about CSPRNG state exposure. I'm wondering how many of you will vote in favor if I change the RFC to use hash functions optionally. This means code and INI settings related to hash function selection will remain. Please note that ext/hash is not built always. If you against keeping hash related code, please let me know also. Thank you! -- Yasuo Ohgaki yohgaki@ohgaki.net