On Tue, 3 Oct 2000, Kevin Elliott wrote:
>Actually if you can pull that off you've got yourself a darn fine
>real random number generator- any PRNG has to have some period after
>which it will begin to recycle (assuming no other randomness in
>introduced into the system), in which case you j
On Tue, 3 Oct 2000, Kevin Elliott wrote:
>A
>cryptographically strong PRNG would then be a PRNG with a very large
>period and some way of reinjecting randomness to guarantee the device
>never begins to recycle.
>--
>
Isn't that a misnomer though? If randomness is reinjected to
prevent th
At 22:48 -0400 10/2/00, Steve Furlong wrote:
>Bill Stewart wrote:
>> By contrast, if you've got a pseudo-random number generator,
>> which uses some mathematical process to generate the numbers,
>> knowing bits 1...I-1 tells you something about bits I...N,
>> so if the message has structure to
