On 11 November 2016 at 22:20, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek <zbyszek@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Fri, Nov 11, 2016 at 01:20:26PM -0500, Stephen Gallagher wrote: >> I can't think of a reason why we'd need a cryptographically secure >> transformation just to generate a random hostname. > > We want it cryptographically secure to preserve the machine-id. It's > probably not too important in itself, but it's a good idea to keep > it hidden because other hashes might be generated from it. Which lies in the problem. If people are going to derive hashes from it they will do so any way the want and most likely it will be leaked out by someone doing a sum or just copying it etc. If there is something 'unique' on a system, it will leak out eventually. All you can do is try to design to drip out slowly or pour out all at once. Trying to find some happy middle ground ends up usually with it pouring out all at once when no one expected it. > Zbyszek > _______________________________________________ > devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx -- Stephen J Smoogen. _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
