On Mon, Jan 24, 2000 at 08:51:02AM -0500, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> Sandy Harris wrote:
> >
> > Jeff Garzik wrote:
> >
> > > Is it feasible to offer a compile-time option which simply replaces
> > > /dev/random?
> >
> > Methinks that would be an error. You'd be trusting the RNG too much.
> > Use it as an input to /dev/random by all means, but not as a
> > replacement.
>
> Either you trust RNG or you don't. There is no middle ground.
>
> If you do not trust RNG, then using it as a /dev/random entropy source
> is pointless. Why introduce theoretically non-random entropy to the
> /dev/random pool?
Am I missing something here? I thought that you could mix all the non-random
numbers you want into the entropy pool (long live xor), and it will never make
the entropy worse? So I'd say mixing in the RNG won't do any harm, so why not?
--Frank v Waveren fvw@var.cx ICQ# 10074100
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Jan 31 2000 - 21:00:12 EST