[4071] in cryptography@c2.net mail archive
Re: Intel announcements at RSA '99
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (David Honig)
Tue Jan 26 14:10:15 1999
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1999 10:39:07 -0800
To: "James A. Donald" <jamesd@echeque.com>, Dan Geer <geer@world.std.com>,
Ben Laurie <ben@algroup.co.uk>
From: David Honig <honig@sprynet.com>
Cc: cryptography@c2.net
In-Reply-To: <199901260626.WAA01193@proxy3.ba.best.com>
At 10:23 PM 1/25/99 -0800, James A. Donald wrote:
> --
>If the random number generator is sufficiently simple and
>well understood, then the fact that it turns out random
>looking stuff is strong reason to believe that it is working
>as designed.
>
>If the random number generator elaborately massages its
>output, for example by running it through SHA, then it would
>be very difficult to determine that it is working as
>designed.
We seem to be calling for the raw bit stream to be accessable
in addition to the conditioned result. This (plus reverse
engineering) would give some confidence.
Is Intel listening?
...........
David Honig
We will be obliged to take action ourselves -Gore on privacy
