[cryptography] Intel RNG

Tim Dierks tim at dierks.org
Mon Jun 18 14:57:45 EDT 2012


On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 2:51 PM, Matthew Green <matthewdgreen at gmail.com>wrote:

> I think that Jack said most of what I would. The incentives all point in
> the wrong direction.
>

While this is all true, it's also why manufacturers who want persuasive
analysis of their products hire consulting vendors with a brand and track
record strong enough that the end consumer can plausibly believe that their
reputational risk outweighs the manufacturer's desire for a good report.
Cryptography Research is such a vendor. It's reasonable to take a
manufacturer-funded report with a grain of salt, but when consuming any
information, you also have to worry about issues like incompetence and
less-visible incentives that tilt the comprehension or presentation of
facts.

I think taking this report as presumed correct is good enough for most
users to rely upon, but if I was a high-value user with a comparable
budget, I'd consider further investigation.

 - Tim
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.randombit.net/pipermail/cryptography/attachments/20120618/c402c52e/attachment.html>


More information about the cryptography mailing list