[149271] in cryptography@c2.net mail archive
Re: [Cryptography] cheap sources of entropy
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Stephan Neuhaus)
Thu Jan 30 02:03:27 2014
X-Original-To: cryptography@metzdowd.com
Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2014 07:46:06 +0100
From: Stephan Neuhaus <stephan.neuhaus@tik.ee.ethz.ch>
To: dan@geer.org, cryptography@metzdowd.com
In-Reply-To: <20140130041155.1E5262280B0@palinka.tinho.net>
Errors-To: cryptography-bounces+crypto.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@metzdowd.com
On 30.01.2014 05:11, dan@geer.org wrote:
> Recalibrating first principles for a moment, please. My understanding
> is that a mix of N bit streams will be truly unpredictable if any 1 of
> the N bit streams is truly unpredictable.
>
> If that is incorrect, what am I missing? (RTFM is entirely acceptable
> and even gracious if accompanied by a pointer to TFM to R.)
I happen to agree with you. TFM to R for those who don't (and in fact
probably anyone on this thread) would be, in my opinion:
http://www.cypherpunks.to/~peter/06_random.pdf followed by
https://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~pgut001/pubs/nist_rng.pdf .
These are publications that avoid opinion in favour of technical
analysis. From my point of view, they're still the last (or at any rate
the technically most defensible) word on the subject, even though I am
of course willing to learn the error of my ways, if they are accompanied
by, as you say, a pointer to another TFM to R.
Fun,
Stephan
_______________________________________________
The cryptography mailing list
cryptography@metzdowd.com
http://www.metzdowd.com/mailman/listinfo/cryptography
