[cryptography] Intel RNG

ianG iang at iang.org
Mon Jun 18 22:19:32 EDT 2012

On 19/06/12 04:15 AM, Jack Lloyd wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 10:20:35AM -0700, Jon Callas wrote:

>> Un-reviewed crypto is a bane.
> Bad crypto with a rubber stamp review is perhaps worse because someone
> might believe the stamp means something.

Are you assuming there is such a thing as a perfect review?  I don't 
think so, myself.  There are just reviews, some better for some purposes 
than others.  We don't have anything like a complete methodology to do 
this sort of thing.  And as Jon mentioned, all reviews are bound by 
resources, so compromise is a given.

Another way to think about it is to consider the review as a fact that 
adds information.  Each new review adds some information which combines 
into some sort of timeline in history.  It doesn't necessarily tell us 
better, but it certainly sets up a reputational trap (as someone 
mentioned).  Which might be worth something.


More information about the cryptography mailing list