What does weak randomness cover in practice?
weak randomness: The practical scope is Detect predictable randomness used where tokens or secrets need entropy.. Start with the listed entities or files and confirm the result on representative code.
Detect weak randomness before merge.
See how weak randomness fits local review, which evidence Code Radar produces, where coverage ends, and how trusted findings move into CI.
radar scan . --quickWhat weak randomness means here.
The weak randomness rule identifies review patterns that can create exploitable behavior or hide material maintenance risk, then returns the affected location, severity, confidence, and remediation context.
Rule reference
Evidence to inspect
Verify the input scope, finding detail, workflow handoff, and product boundary before you install or buy.
CriterionEvidence to inspectBoundary
Input scopeSelected files, configuration, scan mode, and enabled rules.Only included paths and configured checks are evaluated.
Finding detailFile, line, rule ID, severity, explanation, and repair direction.Illustrative output is not a result from your repository.
Workflow handoffLocal result, report format, agent context, and optional CI signal.Enable exports or CI only when the workflow needs them.
Decision fitUse the same criteria on a real repository before choosing a plan or tool.No universal winner or guaranteed outcome is claimed.
Rule reference
Check this risk locally
Verify the input scope, finding detail, workflow handoff, and product boundary before you install or buy.
The problem this page helps clarify
The useful question is where weak randomness changes the review loop: what enters the scan, who acts on a finding, and which evidence moves forward. Detect predictable randomness used where tokens or secrets need entropy.
- Audience: Developers and reviewers deciding how to handle weak randomness findings before merge.
- Focus: Detect predictable randomness used where tokens or secrets need entropy.
- Review question: What does weak randomness cover in practice?
Coverage and concrete signals
For weak randomness, inspect the concrete scope below instead of relying on a category label. Trace where the random value is consumed and verify that the safer example uses an operating-system-backed source for tokens or secrets.
- Focus: Detect predictable randomness used where tokens or secrets need entropy.
- Workflow: Rule ID: RADAR-SEC-RANDOM
- Coverage and concrete signals: RADAR-SEC-RANDOM, unsafe pattern, safer pattern, Source security
FocusExact file location, rule context, severity, confidence, and remediation guidance.Boundary
Detect predictable randomness used where tokens or secrets need entropy.Trace where the random value is consumed and verify that the safer example uses an operating-system-backed source for tokens or secrets.Simulation, UI decoration, and deterministic tests may not require cryptographic entropy; isolate those uses and test token unpredictability before remediation.
Risky pattern / Safer pattern
weak randomness: A useful result must be explainable to a developer and portable to the next review surface. Inspect the concrete evidence below before changing team policy.
Risky patternSafer pattern
const token = Math.random().toString(36);const token = randomBytes(32).toString("hex");
From local signal to shared gate.
weak randomness: Use the smallest workflow that proves value. Each later step should reuse evidence the team already understands. Detect predictable randomness used where tokens or secrets need entropy.
StepCommand or actionDecision
1Run a quick local scanIs the signal useful?
2Inspect and repair findingsIs the fix specific and reproducible?
3Export portable evidenceDoes the reviewer need SARIF, JSON, or HTML?
4Promote the trusted threshold to CIWhich severity should block a pull request?
radar scan . --quick
radar scan . --format sarif --fail-on highEvidence to inspect before you trust the result.
weak randomness: A useful result must be explainable to a developer and portable to the next review surface. Inspect the concrete evidence below before changing team policy. Trace where the random value is consumed and verify that the safer example uses an operating-system-backed source for tokens or secrets.
- Rule ID: RADAR-SEC-RANDOM
- Exact file location, rule context, severity, confidence, and remediation guidance.
- Terminal output, SARIF, JSON, or HTML artifacts generated from the same finding set.
- Source stays in the workspace or CI runner where the scan executes.
Good fit and limits
Use weak randomness when Developers and reviewers deciding how to handle weak randomness findings before merge. Keep the boundary explicit: Simulation, UI decoration, and deterministic tests may not require cryptographic entropy; isolate those uses and test token unpredictability before remediation.
Run the local proof before adopting a shared gate.
- Good fit: Developers and reviewers deciding how to handle weak randomness findings before merge.
- Not a fit / do not overreach: Simulation, UI decoration, and deterministic tests may not require cryptographic entropy; isolate those uses and test token unpredictability before remediation.
Questions to verify before rollout
These questions keep the decision tied to observable evidence rather than a broad product promise.
Which evidence should I inspect for weak randomness?
weak randomness: Inspect Trace where the random value is consumed and verify that the safer example uses an operating-system-backed source for tokens or secrets. Keep the source location, rule or comparison context, and exported artifact together.
What should I not infer from weak randomness?
weak randomness: Do not infer universal coverage. Simulation, UI decoration, and deterministic tests may not require cryptographic entropy; isolate those uses and test token unpredictability before remediation. Use the relevant comparison or workflow page to test the boundary before changing policy.
What should I try first for weak randomness?
weak randomness: Start with a local run, review one real finding, then choose the linked report, agent, CI, or trust workflow that matches the next decision.
Validate the workflow on your own code.
Start with one local scan, inspect the evidence, and expand to reports, agents, or CI only when the signal is useful.