[cryptography] Intel RNG
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