[cryptography] urandom vs random

Shawn Wilson ag4ve.us at gmail.com
Tue Aug 20 10:19:55 EDT 2013


Not exactly. I think havaged is better at this as you're relying on the same type of data but with a single source. I also don't believe you want a microphone inline in order to do this. You should rely purely on electric noise with the ADC/mixer. I don't even think the volume level affects the quality of the randomness. Though I think you generate more "random" bits at higher levels. 

Again, at this point, I trust a modern linux kernel or havaged more than a rigged solution. 



-----Original Message-----
From: "James A. Donald" <jamesd at echeque.com>
To: cryptography at randombit.net
Sent: Tue, 20 Aug 2013 5:54
Subject: Re: [cryptography] urandom vs random

On 2013-08-20 1:31 AM, ianG wrote:
> It's a recurring theme -- there doesn't seem to be enough market 
> demand for Hardware RNGs.

Every microphone is a hardware RNG

_______________________________________________
cryptography mailing list
cryptography at randombit.net
http://lists.randombit.net/mailman/listinfo/cryptography
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.randombit.net/pipermail/cryptography/attachments/20130820/5ad69754/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the cryptography mailing list