[whatwg] Cryptographically strong random numbers

Tom Mitchell mitch at niftyegg.com
Wed Feb 16 17:15:43 PST 2011


On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 4:29 PM, Allen Wirfs-Brock
<allen at wirfs-brock.com> wrote:
> So, let's get back to the design of an actual ECMAScript API.
>
> I'll repeat a couple of initial points:
> We are now talking about a pure JavaScript API,....
....

Good stuff.

Recall that part of what started this is that folks
asked for improvements to math.random but math.random had
become a key function in many benchmarks.
Improving math.random would have the side effect of
slowing down benchmark results so some felt touching
is was problematic.

Then there were some discussions regarding security hacks
where guessing or inserting well guessed or spoofed results
could compromise business or privacy.  One post had a good
yet short list of links that made it clear that Math.random as it is, is
fragile.

Rather than define a full and new API, an alternate tactic might be  to code up
some "quality" benchmarks metrics where Math.random would be improved
because the benchmarks that identified the quality of the random numbers and
gave better random tools more  weighted value than just wall clock speed.

The other issue that surfaced was a lack of rand-seed management
policy.  If corrected that would effectively make it nearly impossible for
one script to guess anything that might go on in another connection.

It is important for the old Math.random and any new API  that
rand-seed management
policy be well addressed.

I only intend to make the point that a new API will not repair Math.random
as used now by numerous sites.   Adding a new API will give sites new
ways to get it wrong.



-- 

                      T o m   M i t c h e l l
                    mitch-at-niftyegg-dot-com
"My lifetime goal is to be the kind of person my dogs think I am."


More information about the es-discuss mailing list