public inbox for glibc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "bugdal at aerifal dot cx" <sourceware-bugzilla@sourceware.org>
To: glibc-bugs@sourceware.org
Subject: [Bug libc/15615] Poor quality output from rand_r
Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2013 12:38:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <bug-15615-131-fai6C7c4rZ@http.sourceware.org/bugzilla/> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bug-15615-131@http.sourceware.org/bugzilla/>

http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15615

--- Comment #2 from Rich Felker <bugdal at aerifal dot cx> ---
On Thu, Jun 13, 2013 at 08:26:27AM +0000, neleai at seznam dot cz wrote:
> A problem here is that for many users predictability is much more
> important than quality. Developer expects that when he uses rand_r with
> state that he controls will not vary. This can cause extra debbuging hastle
> when
> code mysteriously fails on one machine but not other or desync issues.

Could you explain better what you're concerned about? By
"predictable", do you mean keeping the same sequence it's had in the
past? Aside from that, any PRNG with 32-bit state and 31-bit output is
equally "predictable".

> > To fully fix rand_r, the approach of concatenating multiple iterations should
> > be abandoned in favor of a single-LCG-iteration approach followed by an
> > invertable transformation on the output. Obviously a 32-bit cryptographic block
> > cipher would give the best statistical properties, but it would be slow. In
> 
> This is false, I have a replacement of this with four rounds of AES. On
> intel using aesenc I performance is better than current, I did not
> propose that due of problems above. I wrote a RFC for random
> replacement on libc-alpha, browse archives.

AES itself does not use 32-bit blocks, so you must be using a modified
version. Would you care to explain? I searched the archives but could
not find your post.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.


  parent reply	other threads:[~2013-06-13 12:38 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-06-12 23:39 [Bug libc/15615] New: " bugdal at aerifal dot cx
2013-06-13  8:26 ` [Bug libc/15615] " neleai at seznam dot cz
2013-06-13  8:26 ` [Bug libc/15615] New: " Ondřej Bílka
2013-06-13 12:38 ` bugdal at aerifal dot cx [this message]
2013-06-14 12:11   ` [Bug libc/15615] " Ondřej Bílka
2013-06-14 12:11 ` neleai at seznam dot cz
2013-06-14 15:37 ` bugdal at aerifal dot cx
2013-06-25  6:58   ` Ondřej Bílka
2013-06-25 12:25 ` bugdal at aerifal dot cx
2014-06-13 15:07 ` fweimer at redhat dot com

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=bug-15615-131-fai6C7c4rZ@http.sourceware.org/bugzilla/ \
    --to=sourceware-bugzilla@sourceware.org \
    --cc=glibc-bugs@sourceware.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).