1) You're not completely off here; the primary difference is currently higher quality re-keying for /dev/random, but there are implementation differences. 2) F

1) You're not completely off here; the primary difference is currently higher quality re-keying for /dev/random, but there are implementation differences. 2) From a cryptography standpoint, the precise implementation of the current framework makes /dev/urandom suitable for short-term session keys and padding. This may not hold true for Linux, but for Solaris it has been reviewed and deemed appropriate usage. Fundamentally, it's about constraints placed on the implementation that currently make /dev/random more "secure". In conversing with one of the crypto developers for Solaris, they are considering whether to lessen the distinction between /dev/random and /dev/urandom further in the future.