> On Jul 5, 2017, at 3:08 AM, Ulrich Windl <Ulrich.Windl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >>>> Jeffrey Walton <noloader@xxxxxxxxx> schrieb am 17.06.2017 um 16:23 in Nachricht > <CAH8yC8nHX2r9cfQ0gNeJAUrgSfAS8V16dVHv35BRnLn-YprZCg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>: > > [...] >> But its not clear to me how to ensure uniqueness when its based on >> randomness from the generators. > > Even with a perfect random generator non-unique values are possible (that's why it's random). It's unlikely, but it can happen. The question is whether the probability of non-unique values from /dev/urandom is any higher than that for values read from /dev/random. One _might_ be able to predict the values from /dev/urandom. In the implementations I know, /dev/random and /dev/urandom are the same driver, the only difference is that when you read from /dev/random there's a check for the current entropy level. If you haven't fed enough entropy yet to the driver since startup, and you read /dev/urandom, you get a value that isn't sufficiently secure. If you have a properly constructed RNG, as soon as it's been fed enough entropy it is secure (at least for the next 2^64 bits or so). The notion of "using up entropy" is not meaningful for a good generator. See Bruce Schneier's "Yarrow" paper for the details. paul
