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:         [1]jan@dusatko.org
SkypeID:        darmodej
GPG:            [2]http://www.dusatko.org/downloads/jdusatko.asc

References

   1. mailto:jan@dusatko.org
   2. http://www.dusatko.org/downloads/jdusatko.asc