Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender:	cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Date:	Tue, 21 May 2002 10:53:12 +0200
From:	Corinna Vinschen <corinna-cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
To:	CygWin <cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
Subject:	Re: /dev/[u]random sources
Message-ID:	<20020521105312.C4347@cygbert.vinschen.de>
Mail-Followup-To:	CygWin <cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
References:	<3CE64C14 DOT 2090705 AT lapo DOT it>
Mime-Version:	1.0
In-Reply-To:	<3CE64C14.2090705@lapo.it>
User-Agent:	Mutt/1.3.22.1i

On Sat, May 18, 2002 at 02:41:56PM +0200, Lapo Luchini wrote:
> One othe rlittle thing, why limit the seeding to 512 bytes?
> To avoid "spamming" a function that is "slow"?
> Wouldn't this delay anyhow go in the caller's thread?

A discussion on the OpenSSH developers mailing list (back in 2000
or 2001) convinced me that it doesn't make sense to seed more than
a block size.  Unfortunately I don't remember the exact reasoning.

Corinna

-- 
Corinna Vinschen                  Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Developer                                mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Red Hat, Inc.

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

- Raw text -