Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:97872 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 96401 invoked from network); 19 Jan 2017 11:47:16 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 19 Jan 2017 11:47:16 -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] ([180.42.98.130:44032] helo=es-i.jp) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id 78/11-00729-347A0885 for ; Thu, 19 Jan 2017 06:47:15 -0500 Received: (qmail 77370 invoked by uid 89); 19 Jan 2017 11:47:11 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail-wm0-f53.google.com) (yohgaki@ohgaki.net@74.125.82.53) by 0 with ESMTPA; 19 Jan 2017 11:47:11 -0000 Received: by mail-wm0-f53.google.com with SMTP id c206so73128738wme.0 for ; Thu, 19 Jan 2017 03:47:10 -0800 (PST) X-Gm-Message-State: AIkVDXKN+H5NNbnUPHMGGdbFgQsUiPfb3yCBdLaCfSLXWRqDdW1O8EPV+6zfTTBWdW1z1nn8kv15sgMjgAnHOg== X-Received: by 10.28.230.194 with SMTP id e63mr6948703wmi.25.1484826424387; Thu, 19 Jan 2017 03:47:04 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.195.12.8 with HTTP; Thu, 19 Jan 2017 03:46:23 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <71c26cd6df6f59e76dafd31647852c2e@koti.fimnet.fi> <142a3537a99809cf23d78e0eaadc3aef@gmail.com> <7a359bb08b0ad8b046534c15492cec91@gmail.com> <8cfe7a3ea5a05fc3e5347e9af848ada0@gmail.com> Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2017 20:46:23 +0900 X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: Message-ID: To: Leigh Cc: =?UTF-8?Q?Lauri_Kentt=C3=A4?= , Nikita Popov , "internals@lists.php.net" Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a1147c8249436900546711743 Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Improving mt_rand() seed From: yohgaki@ohgaki.net (Yasuo Ohgaki) --001a1147c8249436900546711743 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Hi Leigh, On Thu, Jan 19, 2017 at 8:25 PM, Leigh wrote: > > You _do_ have to care if it fails. This is a breaking change if it is > not handled. mt_rand is _not_ a CSPRNG, and therefore the absence of a > CSPRNG should not make mt_rand unusable. If we consider mt_rand only, your statement is true. However, PHP as a whole cannot work reliable way w/o CSPRNG and today's standard requires working CSPRNG, doesn't it? If PHP cannot work properly, I don't see the point to make mt_rand work. I don't mind too much about falling back to very weak mt_rand result, but I just don't see the point allowing very weak result than it should/can be. How many of us are willing to allow very weak mt_rand fallback? This could be RFC vote option, if there are few. Regards, P.S. Please note that number of E_ERRORs were added recently when something goes wrong in fatal way . Compare to these, very rarely raised security concerned fatal exception is nothing. IMHO. -- Yasuo Ohgaki yohgaki@ohgaki.net --001a1147c8249436900546711743--