From f35cc22f00f3f0688e33d0ba8534460801196a1b Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Roman Donchenko Date: Thu, 25 Dec 2025 21:09:26 +0200 Subject: [PATCH] PEP 504: Fix Sphinx reference warnings For #4087. The problematic footnotes are actually referenced, the syntax is just slightly incorrect. --- peps/pep-0504.rst | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/peps/pep-0504.rst b/peps/pep-0504.rst index 106bb6cf03f..ed00690874c 100644 --- a/peps/pep-0504.rst +++ b/peps/pep-0504.rst @@ -177,7 +177,7 @@ This is reflected in regular notifications of data breaches involving personally identifiable information [#breaches]_, as well as with failures to take security considerations into account when new systems, like motor vehicles [#uconnect]_, are connected to the internet. It's also the case that a lot of -the programming advice readily available on the internet [#search] simply +the programming advice readily available on the internet [#search]_ simply doesn't take the mathematical arcana of computer security into account. Compounding these issues is the fact that defenders have to cover *all* of their potential vulnerabilities, as a single mistake can make it possible to @@ -277,7 +277,7 @@ generator towards explicitly calling ``random.ensure_repeatable()``. Avoiding the introduction of a userspace CSPRNG ----------------------------------------------- -The original discussion of this proposal on python-ideas[#csprng]_ suggested +The original discussion of this proposal on python-ideas [#csprng]_ suggested introducing a cryptographically secure pseudo-random number generator and using that by default, rather than defaulting to the relatively slow system random number generator.