4 ms·

The article is a bit vague about what exactly they're trying to say. What was unexpected? I read it three times before I decided they're comparing a lousy hom

The article is a bit vague about what exactly they're trying to say. What was unexpected? I read it three times before I decided they're comparing a lousy homegrown software RNG to the Pi's hardware RNG, which turns out to be good. Yes? Why would that be unexpected?

wodenokoto 13y ago
The way I read it was that it is surprising that it is there at all. Apparently a lot of android devices don't have one, and don't have time to collect pseudo random data for their software rng to make secure certificates when you boot it for the first time, which posses a security risk for android devices. That's how I read the article in relation to recent news.
- steevdave 13y ago
  Actually most ARM processors do have a hardware RNG, just that few companies write a driver for them
lambda 13y ago
The impression I got was that the existence of a hardware random number generator was unexpected. The rest was just demonstrating that it works, and produces pretty reliable random output. In order to do that, they used a standard tool that tests randomness. But it's nice to make sure your randomness test tool is actually good; so using it on a known-bad RNG, and seeing that it does fail, is a good way to demonstrate that.
Dylan16807 13y ago
Especially confusing is when the article suddenly says "This is not random". But oh what it means is that the upcoming part of the article, on a completely different topic from the Pi, is not random.
scruss 13y ago
I wrote the article. I'm guessing not everyone on HN is a huge fan of “Strictly Ballroom”, as the title is a key quote for dance movie otaku. It was also a weak joke about testing for random numbers; I'm imagining a little subroutine in a constant state of surprise when it encounters the next random number. While I'm not sure if I implemented it correctly, RANDU isn't some ‘lousy homegrown software RNG’. It was the standard RNG for IBM mainframes in the late 1960s.

wodenokoto 13y ago

The way I read it was that it is surprising that it is there at all. Apparently a lot of android devices don't have one, and don't have time to collect pseudo random data for their software rng to make secure certificates when you boot it for the first time, which posses a security risk for android devices. That's how I read the article in relation to recent news.

steevdave 13y ago
Actually most ARM processors do have a hardware RNG, just that few companies write a driver for them

lambda 13y ago

The impression I got was that the existence of a hardware random number generator was unexpected. The rest was just demonstrating that it works, and produces pretty reliable random output. In order to do that, they used a standard tool that tests randomness. But it's nice to make sure your randomness test tool is actually good; so using it on a known-bad RNG, and seeing that it does fail, is a good way to demonstrate that.

Dylan16807 13y ago

Especially confusing is when the article suddenly says "This is not random". But oh what it means is that the upcoming part of the article, on a completely different topic from the Pi, is not random.

scruss 13y ago

I wrote the article. I'm guessing not everyone on HN is a huge fan of “Strictly Ballroom”, as the title is a key quote for dance movie otaku. It was also a weak joke about testing for random numbers; I'm imagining a little subroutine in a constant state of surprise when it encounters the next random number. While I'm not sure if I implemented it correctly, RANDU isn't some ‘lousy homegrown software RNG’. It was the standard RNG for IBM mainframes in the late 1960s.