Re: More powerful (and backward compatible) API of random number generator functions
On Sun, Sep 1, 2013 at 3:12 PM, Jakub Zelenka <[email protected]> wrote:
> The whole proposal is a bit confusing for me. The combination of PRNG
> algorithm (MT) with libraries (libc, OpenSSL, GMP) that implements one or
> more PRNG algorithms just doesn't make sense to me. It doesn't say anything
> about the speed and crypto strength of the algorithms. I think that much
> better solution would be an extension that implements a couple of
> algorithms. Then you could select what algorithm you want to use. The good
> idea would be to have some reasonable default algorithm that would be used
> if the user doesn't know anything about algorithms. This could be
> implemented as an extension and if it's good enough then it could be
> proposed as the core addition.
Except a few very well known algorithm (MT, SIMD MT and the likes)
with well tested implementation, I would not even try to implement
anything else on our own, even less for crypto safe algorithms. This
is something really hard to implement and I know very little new
algorithm or new implementations actually working as expected, and
they were done by experts, not people like you and me :)
Relying on well tested libraries or devices (harware like those
avaiable in the new haswel serie, /dev/*random, etc.) is a much
better approach and let us focus on the APIs we will provide in the
userland side.
Cheers,
--
Pierre
@pierrejoye | http://www.libgd.org
Thread (12 messages)