[12996] in cryptography@c2.net mail archive
Re: Via puts RNGs on new processors
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (David Wagner)
Wed Apr 9 13:51:14 2003
X-Original-To: cryptography@wasabisystems.com
X-Original-To: cryptography@wasabisystems.com
X-Envelope-To: cryptography@wasabisystems.com
To: cryptography@wasabisystems.com
From: daw@mozart.cs.berkeley.edu (David Wagner)
Date: 9 Apr 2003 15:21:21 GMT
X-Complaints-To: news@abraham.cs.berkeley.edu
Ian Grigg wrote:
>My world view would be that there is no such
>thing as an acceptable off-the-shelf RNG.
Why not? You rely on an off-the-shelf CPU, don't you?
The CPU must be trusted just as much as the RNG.
>If one is relying on some commercially acceptable
>rating, then one has also to ensure that the
>entire distribution chain - how you got that
>chip - is also safe. If there are such things
>as "good" Via chips alongside "bad" Via chips,
>how do we know that a bad chip wasn't substituted
>in at the last moment?
Do you worry about this for your CPU? If not, why should
the RNG component of your CPU be any different?
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The Cryptography Mailing List
Unsubscribe by sending "unsubscribe cryptography" to majordomo@wasabisystems.com
