Dne 4. 8. 2017 v 18:24 Izaac napsal(a):

On Thu, Aug 03, 2017 at 01:54:06PM -0500, \0xDynamite wrote:

that such generators are "psuedo-random", but I don't think is true.

"Anyone who attempts to generate random numbers by deterministic means is,
of course, living in a state of sin." - John von Neumann

To better understanding. The description of the random number should be as long as the random number. The algorithm can be considered as one of random number descriptions. Therefore, any number generated by RNG algorithm and longer than the algorithm description can not be considered as random. This number can only be considered as pseudo-random.

John von Neumann has right. Questions are almost simple.
Do we use random number? Probably no. We using CSPRNG, which is, based on our knowledge, closest to the random as much as possible.
Can we test randomness? We can say almost yes. But better maybe.
Can this affect cryptography? Maybe. Better - weak RNG will affect it. But we not sure how much difference make the good and perfect RNG.
Can we generate random number? Maybe, using TRNG.
And, the hardest one. What is exactly mean random number? Can choosing of numbers without any relations between them provide for us enought randomnes? How much of perfect random signal can be? This can lead to one crazy question - if the perfect random will be a small subset, can we be in risk use one of them?
Lot of people do hard work understanding, what is it random. How we test random. How we detect random. And, how we can use random. We all enjoy their hard work.

-- 
Jan Dušátko

Phone:		+420 602 427 840
e-mail:		jan@dusatko.org
SkypeID:	darmodej
GPG:		http://www.dusatko.org/downloads/jdusatko.asc