On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 4:11 PM, <d...@geer.org> wrote: > ... > For this to be an explicit line item in that document, it > has to be special. The two classes of "special" that occur > to me are (1) XXXXXX has a near monopoly (like Broadcom > does in its sector) or (2) XXXXXX is uniquely vulnerable to > blackmail (a merchant with an export control problem, say).
you ask interesting questions Dan, and draw useful conclusions :) some items to note: - is this DUAL_EC_DRNG? don't think so. deadline is FY 2013. - is this DUAL_EC_DRNG? the market for closed source, proprietary crypto solutions is small (and growing smaller, :( - is this XSTORE? it's been a while. but never should have been used directly. see mtrngd with MSR bits set no whitening, max sample, max freq. into mix + conservative estimate before /dev/random write. > But in related news: > > Engineers abandon encryption chips after Snowden leaks > http://rt.com/usa/snowden-leak-rng-randomness-019/ some cryptographers and cypherpunks have become despondent or dejected or demoralized by these events. i see a larger picture: never before have so many been doing crypto less wrong! ;P best regards, cross post from cpunks list to save cert for https://peertech.org/ with sha256 C6:5E:C0:43:56:84:2E:11:A3:35:C8:AC:A9:70:96:7B:A5:2E:5B:77 from godaddy with their ident keyid:40:C2:BD:27:8E:CC:34:83:30:A2:33:D7:FB:6C:B3:F0:B4:2C:80:CE i'm not going to replace cert until jan2014 unless "... it went bad from there". _______________________________________________ cryptography mailing list cryptography@randombit.net http://lists.randombit.net/mailman/listinfo/cryptography
