On Sun, Sep 08, 2013 at 03:00:39PM +1000, James A. Donald wrote: > On 2013-09-08 1:25 PM, Thor Lancelot Simon wrote: > >On Sun, Sep 08, 2013 at 08:34:53AM +1000, James A. Donald wrote: > >>Well, since you personally did this, would you care to explain the > >>very strange design decision to whiten the numbers on chip, and not > >>provide direct access to the raw unwhitened output. > >You know as soon as anyone complained about this, they turned around > >and provided access to the unwhitened output in the next major version > >of the same product family, right? > > I am not aware of this. Could you provide further details?
http://software.intel.com/en-us/blogs/2012/11/17/the-difference-between-rdrand-and-rdseed > And since no one needs high bandwidth true random numbers, why the > on chip whitening? Surely there was some internal discussion of > this decision? A) I don't agree with your premise. B) Are you under the misapprehension that I work for Intel? _______________________________________________ cryptography mailing list cryptography@randombit.net http://lists.randombit.net/mailman/listinfo/cryptography
