On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 5:42 AM, Barry Warsaw <ba...@python.org> wrote:
> On Jun 22, 2016, at 10:37 PM, Donald Stufft wrote: > > >so the question I think really comes down to whether os.urandom is > something > >we want to provide the best source of (generally) non blocking CSPRNG or > >whether we want it to be a narrow wrapper around whatever semantics > >/dev/urandom specifically has. > > ... with os.getrandom() exposed on platforms that provide it. > Personally I think it's better to have one API than two, even if it is named after a platform-specific API. FWIW I don't really buy the philosophy that the os module should only provide thin wrappers over what the platform offers. E.g. in the case of Windows most of what's in the os module is part of Microsoft's libc emulation, and the platform APIs have a totally different shape. os.urandom()'s past is already another example. So I don't see a reason to offer two different APIs and force users of those APIs to either commit to a platform or use an ugly try/except. Especially since in Python <= 3.5 they'll only have os.urandom(). -- --Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido)
_______________________________________________ Security-SIG mailing list Security-SIG@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/security-sig
