whispering

6 ms·

1.
by whispering 4y ago
Absolutely 100% no advantage whatsoever. Absolutely 100% more fun.
2.
by whispering 4y ago
I am not able to motivate further, it's just that usually when we talk about random numbers we mean uniformly distributed random numbers. It is not a requirement in a strict sense. It's just the easier way to tell about randomness
3.
by whispering 4y ago
Me neither, and I'm the author. But whatever.
4.
by whispering 4y ago
Yep but the main point that i was trying to make is that to get a faster generator you need a faster clock and a bigger timer, not a bigger detector nor more events, if you cannot back them up with the faster clock and bigger timer
5.
by whispering 4y ago
The throughput is given by the frequency of the radioactive events. This can easily made bigger with a more radioactive source. The limit in this is how fast is the underlying reference timer. If you could have a fast enough timer, you coul
6.
by whispering 4y ago
I should try and see. The inhibit from the monostable timer could somewhat "transfer" the randomness source from the geiger to the time constant of the 555
7.
by whispering 4y ago
Fair point. However I don't think you'd be able to easily manipulate the random stream. By triggering the random tube you just generate a random number, but even by triggering it continuously you cannot directly manipulate the byt
8.
by whispering 4y ago
Definitely a slow method! It outputs about 1 byte every second. Not great performance! This 22KB sample took several hours to collect: https://github.com/valerionew/Banana-Random-Number-Generator...
9.
by whispering 4y ago
Didn't we agree on the fact that if an attacker gains physical access the security is already compromised? Otherwise you could just inject whatever you want from the uart, no need for any x-ray gun.
10.
by whispering 4y ago
KCl is definitely detectable. And the same goes for KOH. And it significantly increases the throughput.
11.
by whispering 4y ago
Author here. There is a part 2 that explains the generation in detail, you find it linked below the part 1, or at the link [0]. The banana does not make a significant difference (the generator can operate without it), however the potassium
12.
by whispering 4y ago
It's pretty similar to mine, you could improve yours by relying on an hardware timer/counter that can go faster and thus provide more entropy. Also you should not reset the counter at every event, this would lead to a poisson dist
13.
by whispering 4y ago
Nice! Are you the author? Looks very similar to mine in the principles of operation! I wonder if the author got some inspiration from my work, that would be amazing!
14.
by whispering 4y ago
That would be the case if i was resetting the counter at every read. Instead, it does not reset the counter, so it does not always start from 0. So the analogy would hold only for the very first number. Btw here is a sample of the data gath
15.
by whispering 4y ago
Author here! The numbers are generated directly from the current timer/counter value at the moment of the event. I'm not at all measuring time BETWEEN events. It's just a counter that overflows ~300 times per second (20MHz cl
16.
A true random number generator based on bananas radioactive decay(valerionappi.it)
16 points by whispering 4y ago|10 comments