Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

Add Get-SecureRandom cmdlet #19587

Merged
merged 7 commits into from
May 2, 2023
Merged

Add Get-SecureRandom cmdlet #19587

merged 7 commits into from
May 2, 2023

Conversation

SteveL-MSFT
Copy link
Member

@SteveL-MSFT SteveL-MSFT commented Apr 28, 2023 •
edited
Loading

PR Summary

Add a Get-SecureRandom cmdlet which does not expose a -SetSeed parameter ensuring results are always cryptographically secure. Get-Random is derived from this cmdlet and maintains the -SetSeed parameter. The only changes to the move of code from GetRandomCommand is changing some members to internal from private so that Get-Random can call them.

The tests are a copy of the Get-Random tests removing the -SetSeed tests and adding a specific test to ensure that parameter doesn't exist.

PR Context

Users of Get-Random who use -SetSeed may mistakenly think they are cryptographically secure but is not since a seed is used. This new cmdlet makes it easy to not make this mistake.

PR Checklist

@iSazonov
Copy link
Collaborator

iSazonov commented Apr 28, 2023 •
edited
Loading

Is "Secure" right term if "strong crypto" is assumed? Maybe "Get-StrongRandom".

@MartinGC94
Copy link
Contributor

Why not just emit a warning if the SetSeed parameter is used? If a new Get-SecureRandom command is added people will probably assume that Get-Random is insecure, when in reality it's only insecure in specific circumstances.

@SteveL-MSFT
Copy link
Member Author

@MartinGC94 I considered adding a warning when -SetSeed is used, but when used in automation, no one will likely see the warning. You're correct that the default usage of Get-Random is secure, but the intent here is to make it more clear. Get-Random will continue to work as it does today so this is really for newer users.

@iSazonov I chose Get-SecureRandom primarily to match the naming of the *-SecureString cmdlets even though there is no relation functionally between the two. Strong or Crypto would only be meaningful to someone who already understands the implications of -SetSeed and the name is really for those who may not.

PaulHigin
PaulHigin approved these changes May 1, 2023
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@PaulHigin PaulHigin left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM

src/Microsoft.PowerShell.Commands.Utility/commands/utility/GetSecureRandomCommand.cs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@daxian-dbw daxian-dbw added the WG-Cmdlets general cmdlet issues label May 1, 2023
@daxian-dbw daxian-dbw added the Needs-Triage The issue is new and needs to be triaged by a work group. label May 1, 2023
SteveL-MSFT and others added 2 commits May 1, 2023 16:17
@SteveL-MSFT @JamesWTruher
Update test/powershell/Modules/Microsoft.PowerShell.Utility/Get-Secur…
282431b 
…eRandom.Tests.ps1

Co-authored-by: James Truher [MSFT] <jimtru@microsoft.com>
@SteveL-MSFT
address codefactor
05589a1
@SteveL-MSFT SteveL-MSFT mentioned this pull request May 2, 2023
Closed
2 tasks
@pull-request-quantifier-deprecated
Copy link

This PR has 720 quantified lines of changes. In general, a change size of upto 200 lines is ideal for the best PR experience!

Quantification details 

Label      : Extra Large
Size       : +434 -286
Percentile : 90.67%

Total files changed: 7

Change summary by file extension:
.cs : +295 -284
.psd1 : +2 -2
.ps1 : +137 -0

Change counts above are quantified counts, based on the PullRequestQuantifier customizations.

Why proper sizing of changes matters

Optimal pull request sizes drive a better predictable PR flow as they strike a
balance between between PR complexity and PR review overhead. PRs within the
optimal size (typical small, or medium sized PRs) mean:

  • Fast and predictable releases to production:
    • Optimal size changes are more likely to be reviewed faster with fewer
      iterations.
    • Similarity in low PR complexity drives similar review times.
  • Review quality is likely higher as complexity is lower:
    • Bugs are more likely to be detected.
    • Code inconsistencies are more likely to be detected.
  • Knowledge sharing is improved within the participants:
    • Small portions can be assimilated better.
  • Better engineering practices are exercised:
    • Solving big problems by dividing them in well contained, smaller problems.
    • Exercising separation of concerns within the code changes.

What can I do to optimize my changes

  • Use the PullRequestQuantifier to quantify your PR accurately
    • Create a context profile for your repo using the context generator
    • Exclude files that are not necessary to be reviewed or do not increase the review complexity. Example: Autogenerated code, docs, project IDE setting files, binaries, etc. Check out the Excluded section from your prquantifier.yaml context profile.
    • Understand your typical change complexity, drive towards the desired complexity by adjusting the label mapping in your prquantifier.yaml context profile.
    • Only use the labels that matter to you, see context specification to customize your prquantifier.yaml context profile.
  • Change your engineering behaviors
    • For PRs that fall outside of the desired spectrum, review the details and check if:
      • Your PR could be split in smaller, self-contained PRs instead
      • Your PR only solves one particular issue. (For example, don't refactor and code new features in the same PR).

How to interpret the change counts in git diff output

  • One line was added: +1 -0
  • One line was deleted: +0 -1
  • One line was modified: +1 -1 (git diff doesn't know about modified, it will
    interpret that line like one addition plus one deletion)
  • Change percentiles: Change characteristics (addition, deletion, modification)
    of this PR in relation to all other PRs within the repository.

Was this comment helpful? 👍  :ok_hand:  :thumbsdown: (Email)
Customize PullRequestQuantifier for this repository.

@TravisEz13 TravisEz13 merged commit a153446 into PowerShell:master May 2, 2023
@SteveL-MSFT SteveL-MSFT deleted the get-securerandom branch May 2, 2023 18:01
@crisman crisman mentioned this pull request May 30, 2023
Closed
3 tasks
@sdwheeler sdwheeler added PowerShell-Docs needed The PR was reviewed and a PowerShell Docs update is needed and removed Needs-Triage The issue is new and needs to be triaged by a work group. labels Jun 1, 2023
@adityapatwardhan adityapatwardhan added the CL-General Indicates that a PR should be marked as a general cmdlet change in the Change Log label Jun 28, 2023
@ghost
Copy link

ghost commented Jun 29, 2023

🎉v7.4.0-preview.4 has been released which incorporates this pull request.:tada:

Handy links:

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@JamesWTruher JamesWTruher JamesWTruher left review comments

@TravisEz13 TravisEz13 TravisEz13 approved these changes

@PaulHigin PaulHigin PaulHigin approved these changes

@iSazonov iSazonov iSazonov approved these changes

Assignees

@TravisEz13 TravisEz13

Labels
CL-General Indicates that a PR should be marked as a general cmdlet change in the Change Log Extra Large PowerShell-Docs needed The PR was reviewed and a PowerShell Docs update is needed WG-Cmdlets general cmdlet issues
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
9 participants
@SteveL-MSFT @iSazonov @MartinGC94 @JamesWTruher @TravisEz13 @PaulHigin @daxian-dbw @adityapatwardhan @sdwheeler