Subject: Re: replace kernel random number function
From: Ignatios Souvatzis <email@example.com>
Date: 10/23/2000 15:43:39
On Tue, Oct 24, 2000 at 12:41:35AM +1100, Simon Burge wrote:
> firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
> > deraadt told me that i should not replace random(9), as there can be
> > some code depending on poorness, or uniformity, of random(9).
> ??? Can you/he point to some examples of this? Sounds a little bit
> suspect to me...
Who _does_ call random(9), anyway? (Other than tcp isn generation?)
* Progress (n.): The process through which Usenet has evolved from
smart people in front of dumb terminals to dumb people in front of
smart terminals. -- email@example.com (obscurity)