">" should be ">>". This typo results in failure to use all of the bits
of the provided seed.
This might rise to the level of a security bug if we were relying on
srand48 for any security-critical purposes, but we are not --- in fact,
it's not used at all unless the platform lacks srandom(), which is
improbable. Even on such a platform the exposure seems minimal.
Reported privately by Andres Freund.
{
_rand48_seed[0] = RAND48_SEED_0;
_rand48_seed[1] = (unsigned short) seed;
- _rand48_seed[2] = (unsigned short) (seed > 16);
+ _rand48_seed[2] = (unsigned short) (seed >> 16);
_rand48_mult[0] = RAND48_MULT_0;
_rand48_mult[1] = RAND48_MULT_1;
_rand48_mult[2] = RAND48_MULT_2;