Re: Support getrandom() for pg_strong_random() source
От | Jacob Champion |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Support getrandom() for pg_strong_random() source |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAOYmi+k-199FZAZqCdg1t_-_5GODp8L_R4UUjqF1hK2j-aZF4g@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Support getrandom() for pg_strong_random() source (Daniel Gustafsson <daniel@yesql.se>) |
Ответы |
Re: Support getrandom() for pg_strong_random() source
Re: Support getrandom() for pg_strong_random() source |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Sep 30, 2025 at 12:44 AM Daniel Gustafsson <daniel@yesql.se> wrote: > What if we instead expand the API to provide pg_random (or pg_fast_random) > which can be a selectable implementation, and pg_strong_random is left as today > a compile time selection? I like the idea of tiering it, but I'm not sure how to communicate to developers when they should prefer pg_strong_random over pg_fast_random over pg_prng (which is hopefully faster than pg_fast_random!). Is the dividing line really strong vs fast, or is it compliance vs noncompliance? Because I have a feeling that for some users, the "fast" alternative that is chosen will be stronger than the "strong" version they are mandated to select. Are there any use cases other than UUID that want CSPRNG guarantees without needing CSPRNG security? --Jacob
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: