On 19/03/2016 19:48, Eugene Salamin via math-fun wrote:
For cryptosecure, I don't see how you can do better than a physical noise or quantum source. Why do computer science people so disdain physical RNG's; it is because they don't involve fun things like algorithm analysis?
That seems unnecessary cynical. 1. You can surely get random bits out of a purely algorithmic thing faster than you can out of a typical physical source. 2. Your physical source is likely to need substantial "whitening" to give independent random bits, so you need something quite like an RNG in there anyway. 3. If the physical source isn't one you've built yourself, you're having to rely on someone else's possibly unknown hardware, and who knows what "features" it might have? 4. If it is one you've built yourself, you've just added substantial complexity and cost to whatever system you're making. I'm all in favour of making use of actual physical randomness sources where possible, but I think you're going too far here. -- g