[16682] in cryptography@c2.net mail archive
Re: entropy depletion (was: SSL/TLS passive sniffing)
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Taral)
Sun Jan 9 21:39:49 2005
X-Original-To: cryptography@metzdowd.com
X-Original-To: cryptography@metzdowd.com
Date: Sun, 9 Jan 2005 13:12:53 -0600
From: Taral <taral@taral.net>
To: Enzo Michelangeli <em@em.no-ip.com>
Cc: cryptography@metzdowd.com, Michael_Heyman@McAfee.com
In-Reply-To: <04cf01c4f52c$50dddd20$0200a8c0@em.noip.com>
--0OAP2g/MAC+5xKAE
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Sat, Jan 08, 2005 at 10:46:17AM +0800, Enzo Michelangeli wrote:
> But that was precisely my initial position: that the insight on the
> internal state (which I saw, by definition, as the loss of entropy by the
> generator) that we gain from one bit of output is much smaller than one
> full bit.=20
I think this last bit is untrue. You will find that the expected number
of states of the PRNG after extracting one bit of randomness is half of
the number of states you had before, thus resulting in one bit of
entropy loss.
--=20
Taral <taral@taral.net>
This message is digitally signed. Please PGP encrypt mail to me.
A: Because it fouls the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing on usenet and in e-mail?
--0OAP2g/MAC+5xKAE
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.5 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFB4YI1tOVKlL8cHDcRAmanAJ98c2RnUcZV1WALPBqwmlQZvh2m+ACbBjtC
mMj3us1TDYYiA6UewM4GDvo=
=4FtR
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--0OAP2g/MAC+5xKAE--
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The Cryptography Mailing List
Unsubscribe by sending "unsubscribe cryptography" to majordomo@metzdowd.com
