At 05:13 PM 10/21/02 -0400, Tyler Durden wrote:
So I guess the follow on question is: Even if you can look at the code
of a
RNG...how easy is it to determine if its output is usefully random,
or are
there certain Diffie-approved RNGs that should always be there, and
if not
something's up?
Start
output is usefully random, or are
there certain Diffie-approved RNGs that should always be there, and if not
something's up?
From: Major Variola (ret) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Intel Security processor + a question
Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2002 10:21:28 -0700
--
On 21 Oct 2002 at 10:21, Major Variola (ret) wrote:
But no such does it look random test can tell good
PRNG from TRNG. You must peek under the hood.
More generally, one can never know something is random merely
by looking at it, but only by knowing why it is random. One
must have both
At 07:40 PM 10/18/02 -0400, Tyler Durden wrote:
Well,I disagree about psuedo random number generation, sort of.
First, if I have PSR sequence of the known variety (ie, ANSI or ITU),
and if
it's mapped to some telecom standard (DS-1/3, OC-3/12/48/192), then my
test
set can and should be able to
[There's been some discussion of whether you can trust hardware crypto.]
At 11:54 AM 10/18/2002 -0400, Tyler Durden wrote:
OK...a follow up question (actually, really the same question in a
diferent form).
Let's say I had a crypto chip or other encryption engine, the code of
which I could not
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Intel Security processor + a question
Date: Thu, 17 Oct 2002 11:49:33 -0400
Intel is moving Security onto its Network processor chips...a quote also
follows.
http://www.lightreading.com/document.asp?site=lightreadingdoc_id=22749
+ a question
Date: Fri, 18 Oct 2002 14:33:15 -0700
From: Tyler Durden [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Intel Security processor + a question
OK...a follow up question (actually, really the same question in a
diferent
form).
Let's say I had a crypto chip or other encryption engine, the code
Intel is moving Security onto its Network processor chips...a quote also
follows.
http://www.lightreading.com/document.asp?site=lightreadingdoc_id=22749
(Begin quote)
For now, Intel is tackling very high- and low-end systems. The IXP2850 is
derived from the IXP2800, which targets 10-Gbit/s
On Thu, 17 Oct 2002, Tyler Durden wrote:
If crypto is performed by hardware, how sure can users/designers be that it
is truly secure (since one can't examine the code)? Is there any way to
determine whether standard forms of encryption have been monkeyed with in
some way (ie, to make those
On Thu, 17 Oct 2002, Tyler Durden wrote:
If crypto is performed by hardware, how sure can users/designers be that it
is truly secure (since one can't examine the code)?
Deterministic algorithms with known internal state and fed with same test
vectors generate exactly the same output as their
On Thu, 17 Oct 2002, Tyler Durden wrote:
If crypto is performed by hardware, how sure can users/designers be that it
is truly secure (since one can't examine the code)?
Deterministic algorithms with known internal state and fed with same test
vectors generate exactly the same output as their
11 matches
Mail list logo
