James A. Donald wrote:
> > I see no valid case for on chip whitening. Whitening
> > looks like a classic job for software. Why waste chip
> > real estate on something that will only be used 0.001% of
> > the time.
On 2012-06-22 6:53 AM, Michael Nelson wrote:
> I suppose that if the rng was shared between multiple
> processes, and if a malicious process could read the
> internal state, then it could predict what another process
> was going to be given in the near future.
To the extent that rng generates true randomness, it can only partially
predict. Assuming that each process collects sufficient true randomness
for its purposes, not a problem. That is the whole point and purpose of
generating true randomness.
_______________________________________________
cryptography mailing list
cryptography@randombit.net
http://lists.randombit.net/mailman/listinfo/cryptography
