From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 81573C433EF for ; Mon, 24 Jan 2022 17:08:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S241505AbiAXRIY (ORCPT ); Mon, 24 Jan 2022 12:08:24 -0500 Received: from pb-smtp20.pobox.com ([173.228.157.52]:52072 "EHLO pb-smtp20.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229666AbiAXRIX (ORCPT ); Mon, 24 Jan 2022 12:08:23 -0500 Received: from pb-smtp20.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp20.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2345A174C6C; Mon, 24 Jan 2022 12:08:21 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:message-id:mime-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; s=sasl; bh=pXZJ2yExInzQP7LHIzGHjFClN HEDVGRsBgfUascCiH8=; b=WH3Y7/T5M+vsCv8YRxtqgoC11hHz2vlVyNISjJq2P 6kLIM29J4geggLxSsW9qDK2bEB8c1Za+rFipOe49ykf0ScyeE7dBfVOpKyy14RHq pA/57kukzjGvnVbt3Hw/3pz4SArOHq/oUoV556dqtNGNEgmBf1MP6os1qyFX5WhQ KE= Received: from pb-smtp20.sea.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp20.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1ADBC174C6B; Mon, 24 Jan 2022 12:08:21 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [104.133.2.91]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp20.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8CF6B174C6A; Mon, 24 Jan 2022 12:08:18 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: =?utf-8?Q?Ren=C3=A9?= Scharfe Cc: =?utf-8?B?w4Z2YXIgQXJuZmrDtnLDsA==?= Bjarmason , "brian m. carlson" , git@vger.kernel.org, rsbecker@nexbridge.com, Taylor Blau , Carlo Marcelo Arenas =?utf-8?Q?Bel=C3=B3n?= , Johannes Schindelin Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] wrapper: use a CSPRNG to generate random file names References: <20220104015555.3387101-1-sandals@crustytoothpaste.net> <20220117215617.843190-1-sandals@crustytoothpaste.net> <20220117215617.843190-3-sandals@crustytoothpaste.net> <220118.86zgntpegy.gmgdl@evledraar.gmail.com> <3a2b17ac-6ce2-cc29-6993-a9718df61741@web.de> Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2022 09:08:17 -0800 Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 39F9A6A0-7D38-11EC-B0E6-C85A9F429DF0-77302942!pb-smtp20.pobox.com Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Ren=C3=A9 Scharfe writes: > ... But > a replacement for git_mkstemp_mode() with two umask(2) calls looks less > attractive to me than fortifying git_mkstemps_mode() with a good source > of randomness. True. Also, it is not like we are supplying our own implementation of random source, but are just pluggig various system-supplied random source into our code, so I do not see the "auditatiblity" problem we heard earlier too much of an issue.