At 03:16 PM 7/21/99 -0500, John Kelsey wrote: >Suppose God, in a fit of budget-consciouness, decides to get >rid of all this wasteful hardware for generating random >numbers that are necessary for quantum mechanics, and >instead replaces them with a PRNG with a 256-bit seed. In >this case, all hardware noise sources are ultimately tapping >into this same seed and PRNG. How will you, or anyone, tell >the difference? (This assumes that God can find some good >pseudorandom function families, of course.) God would then, as Von Neumann put it, be living in a state of sin :-) Thanks! Bill Bill Stewart, [EMAIL PROTECTED] PGP Fingerprint D454 E202 CBC8 40BF 3C85 B884 0ABE 4639
- Re: linux-ipsec: Re: Summa... Gary E. Miller
- Re: linux-ipsec: Re: Summa... Henry Spencer
- semantics of /dev/{u}rando... William Allen Simpson
- Another web secure mail se... John R Levine
- Re: depleting the random n... Arnold G. Reinhold
- Re: depleting the random numbe... John Kelsey
- Re: depleting the random n... bram
- Re: depleting the random n... Bill Frantz
- Re: depleting the random number generat... John Kelsey
- Re: depleting the random number gen... David Honig
- Re: depleting the random number gen... Bill Stewart
- Re: depleting the random number gen... Ben Laurie
- Re: depleting the random number generator Sandy Harris
- Re: depleting the random number generator Marc Horowitz
- RE: depleting the random number generator David Honig
- RE: depleting the random number generator Enzo Michelangeli