On Tue, 5 Oct 2004, Tom Lane wrote:
> now.tv_sec, and it's perfectly portable. No one in their right mind
> expects random(3) to be cryptographically secure anyway, so doing more
> doesn't seem warranted.
Tom, having a source of "real" random data isn't useful just for crypto
applications. No PRNG is perfect, when it comes to statistics.
> The various proposals to create a more-secure, less-portable variant
> of random() don't seem appropriate to me for beta. But I'd not object
> to someone whipping up a contrib module for 8.1 or beyond.
Agreed.
.TM.
--
____/ ____/ /
/ / / Marco Colombo
___/ ___ / / Technical Manager
/ / / ESI s.r.l.
_____/ _____/ _/ Colombo@ESI.it
