Re: new /dev/random

From: David Wagner (daw_at_taverner.cs.berkeley.edu)
Date: 10/07/04


Date: Thu, 7 Oct 2004 17:03:35 +0000 (UTC)

Bill Unruh wrote:
>You clearly have not read the innumerable posts in sci.crypt where
>cryptographers have tried to define randomness. They have no agreed on
>definition to be comfortable with.

Sadly, what one reads in sci.crypt is not always representative of the
cryptography research community. Just because some posters to sci.crypt
are confused does not imply that many cryptographers are confused.
Indeed, the cryptographic community does have an accepted and agreed
upon definition and consensus on how to model randomness.