4 ms·
Can you elaborate on why?
by NegativeK 14y ago
Can you elaborate on why?
- _exec 14y agoI'm curious as well. Why not?
- tptacek 14y ago'pbsd gave a much better answer than I could have.
- pbsd 14y ago1 - Very slow 2 - A nightmare to implement securely 3 - Only exists for the sake of provable security 4 - The same standard defines a much better alternative pseudorandom generators based on hashes and/or block ciphers.
- marshray 14y agoWhich raises the question of why such a useless thing was even standardized in the first place.
- fusiongyro 14y agoFrom that perspective, one wonders if they are instead aware of attacks on the other three and designed the fourth to withstand those attacks (but look suspicious and be unappealingly slow). Overall, the mental game is quite taxing, so I'm going to plead "bureaucracy."
- marshray 14y agoThat seems unlikely, DRBGs are really quite solid little things. Or in other words, if the other NIST DRBGs are significantly broken it would almost certainly imply that the hash functions upon which they were built are broken much much worse.
- fusiongyro 14y agoIt's easy to see how one could get caught up in a web of paranoid implications, each one less likely to be true than the one before.