Thierry Moreau [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I find the question should be refined.
It could if there was a large enough repondent base to draw samples from :-).
This is one of those surveys that can never be done because no vendor will
publicly talk to you about security measures in their
On 10/24/2008 03:40 PM, Jack Lloyd wrote:
Perhaps our seeming disagreement is due to a differing interpretation
of 'trusted'. I took it to mean that at least one pool had a
min-entropy above some security bound. You appear to have taken it to
mean that it will be uniform random?
Thanks, that
Jonathan Katz wrote:
I think it depends on what you mean by N pools of entropy.
I can see that my description was a bit weak, yes. Here's a better
view, incorporating the feedback:
If I have N people, each with a single pool of entropy,
and I pool each of their contributions together
Paul Hoffman wrote:
At 11:08 AM -0700 8/21/08, Greg Rose wrote:
Adi mentioned that the slides and paper will go online around the
deadline for Eurocrypt submission; it will all become much clearer
than my wounded explanations then.
There now: http://eprint.iacr.org/2008/385
Given all the
