5 ms·
The difference here is that there is virtually no way for there to be a bug, virus, malware, keylogger, etc that might break the true randomness of the dice rol
by doctoboggan 6y ago
The difference here is that there is virtually no way for there to be a bug, virus, malware, keylogger, etc that might break the true randomness of the dice roll where all those are a possibility for the computer generated version.
- teddyh 6y agoI feel that the risk of my /dev/random being broken is much lower than some random website being intercepted or assimilated.
- doctoboggan 6y agoThe website is just an easy way to transfer the random numbers to your computer (which you arguably shouldn’t use if you need something like this.) The actual randomness generation is the dice roll, which is less likely to be broken than your /dev/random (which is probably not broken and totally fine to use)
- teddyh 6y agoI’m not comparing my /dev/random to my dice roll. I’m comparing the likelyhood of my /dev/random being broken to the likelyhood of the website being intercepted or assimilated when I use it.
- roywiggins 6y agoDoesn't a large portion of computer security rely on private keys derived through computational "dice rolls" anyway? If RNGs are that broken, the whole internet is broken- breaking a few passwords would be kind of secondary, wouldn't it? First up would be certain Bitcoin wallets, etc.
- theamk 6y agoBut what do you do with this key, once you made it? You scan it. And now there a simple way for "a bug, virus, malware, keylogger, etc" to steal all of your secrets.