On Wed, 29 Sep 2010 13:02:41 -0400 Ted Unangst <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 12:49 PM, Kevin Chadwick <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > And isn't srandom sometimes (very rarely!) appropriate? E.g. for > >> > generating encryption keys? > > If arandom is somehow not appropriate for generating keys, it should > be fixed. I'd be interested to hear more. > > > I notice arandom doesn't pause. Is arandom always better or only when > > there's enough entropy? > > It is more efficient. There is almost always enough entropy for > arandom, and if there isn't, you would have a hard time detecting > that. I love it when you get something that's more secure and more functional. It strikes in the face of sweeping and simplistic statements about security. :C>
