Re: True random numbers
Deranged Mutant <wlkngowl@unix.asb.com> wrote:
maruishi@netcom.com wrote:
I was trying to think of a way to come up with true random numbers... And knowing a bit of UNIX socket TCP/IP programming I made a small [..]
I wouldn't trust the samples taken from networked sources.
Me neither, in general. A possible exception: I wonder if the checksums on Ethernet or IP packets use a reasonably strong CRC algorithm. If so, they might be a decent source of randomness in an environment where you could be sure the Black Hats couldn't see them. e.g. using only packets from your own LAN, suitably protected by firewall & good administration.
You're better off with a kernel patch that samples from local sources directly like disk or keyboard timing variations... such patches already exist, with similar drivers developed for DOS and OS/2 systems as well.
I'd be more inclined to hash the kernel's internal tables, e.g. process & file descriptor tables. These should vary quite a lot & if the enemy can see them, random number quality is the least of your worries. RFC 1750 is a good reference on this problem. -- Sandy Harris sharris@fox.nstn.ca
On Sat, 17 Feb 1996, Sandy Harris wrote:
Deranged Mutant <wlkngowl@unix.asb.com> wrote:
maruishi@netcom.com wrote:
I was trying to think of a way to come up with true random numbers... And knowing a bit of UNIX socket TCP/IP programming I made a small [..]
I wouldn't trust the samples taken from networked sources.
Me neither, in general.
A possible exception: I wonder if the checksums on Ethernet or IP packets use a reasonably strong CRC algorithm. If so, they might be a decent source of randomness in an environment where you could be sure the Black Hats couldn't see them. e.g. using only packets from your own LAN, suitably protected by firewall & good administration.
You're better off with a kernel patch that samples from local sources directly like disk or keyboard timing variations... such patches already exist, with similar drivers developed for DOS and OS/2 systems as well.
I'd be more inclined to hash the kernel's internal tables, e.g. process & file descriptor tables. These should vary quite a lot & if the enemy can see them, random number quality is the least of your worries.
RFC 1750 is a good reference on this problem. -- Sandy Harris sharris@fox.nstn.ca
Although using other networks probably isn't as safe as using your own LAN, ..... If you send the packets across the US then there are more variables to determine time they took to get back. This is obviously becuase each and every machine in between well vary in speed, line connections etc... And the timing even on the same machine well change, because of CPU laod etc.. Maybe another "random" source XORed with this? I don't know, just a though. maruishi@netcom.com
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
"M" == maruishi <maruishi@netcom.com> writes:
M> Maybe another "random" source XORed with this? I don't know, just a M> though. Somewhere during developement of the Linux 1.3.* kernel a "(pseudo-)random-number device" was introduced. Perhaps the sources of this can give you some ideas. Have a nice day! Olmur - -- "If privacy is outlawed, only outlaws will have privacy" --- P. Zimmermann Please encipher your mail! Contact me, if you need assistance. finger -l mdeindl@eisbaer.bb.bawue.de for PGP-key Key-fingerprint: 51 EC A5 D2 13 93 8F 91 CB F7 6C C4 F8 B5 B6 7C -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3i Charset: latin1 Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.4, an Emacs/PGP interface iQCVAwUBMScG1Q9NARnYm1I1AQENqgP+O0qeiuyzYDBDsEgLxcy4e5eC1VVgskda G45Gow9JHXzLuK+rV9SRLJFXRppM6mgQySop6SvikI+aCraKQK+XsqQEatQPdBHd cGm5cw9wHf5PGEjmOksmRonbeh+y7AoNqkdwnSLD8NW4823pEKR7fPMB+UCcZj/g xyhY42kUWvs= =CSca -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
On Sun, 18 Feb 1996, Olmur wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
"M" == maruishi <maruishi@netcom.com> writes:
M> Maybe another "random" source XORed with this? I don't know, just a M> though.
Somewhere during developement of the Linux 1.3.* kernel a "(pseudo-)random-number device" was introduced. Perhaps the sources of this can give you some ideas.
Have a nice day!
Olmur - -- "If privacy is outlawed, only outlaws will have privacy" --- P. Zimmermann Please encipher your mail! Contact me, if you need assistance.
finger -l mdeindl@eisbaer.bb.bawue.de for PGP-key Key-fingerprint: 51 EC A5 D2 13 93 8F 91 CB F7 6C C4 F8 B5 B6 7C
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3i Charset: latin1 Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.4, an Emacs/PGP interface
iQCVAwUBMScG1Q9NARnYm1I1AQENqgP+O0qeiuyzYDBDsEgLxcy4e5eC1VVgskda G45Gow9JHXzLuK+rV9SRLJFXRppM6mgQySop6SvikI+aCraKQK+XsqQEatQPdBHd cGm5cw9wHf5PGEjmOksmRonbeh+y7AoNqkdwnSLD8NW4823pEKR7fPMB+UCcZj/g xyhY42kUWvs= =CSca -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
thanx I'll keep that in mind. maruishi@netcom.com
participants (3)
-
maruishi＠netcom.com -
olmur＠dwarf.bb.bawue.de -
Sandy Harris