4 ms·
They describe rc4 as secure, which it hasn't been considered for years, so I'm not sure how seriously to take this site
by EE84M3i 6y ago
They describe rc4 as secure, which it hasn't been considered for years, so I'm not sure how seriously to take this site
- andreareina 6y agoSpeaking of rc4, what are the reproducibility issues? Quick search on mobile didn't turn anything up. Is it just the "alleged" designation, i.e. no confirmation that it implements Rivest's original cipher?
- JoachimS 6y agoIRRC The real RC4 was licensed to Novell and used in Notes. People was later able to use the leaked, alleged rc4 algorithm to decrypt messages encrypted by Notes. That basically confirmed that the algorithms are the same.
- JackeJR 6y ago"secure" in the website refers to predictability. Do you have a source on how to predict rc4?
- hannob 6y agoThe RC4 stream has biases. This means you have something like "bit X is slightly more likely to be 1 than 0". This isn't "predictability" in a sense that you know what it'll be, but it's bad enough for certain applications. How much it matters probably depends how exactly you design your RNG, but it seems like playing with fire and is easily avoidable by using a cipher without that property.
- febstar 6y agoI believe numpy.random uses PCG by default. https://numpy.org/doc/stable/reference/random/index.html https://numpy.org/doc/stable/reference/random/index.html