From: Eric Hughes <hughes@soda.berkeley.edu>
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Message Hash: f19185d260e7315f449c4ed090535dde971be63aaa22c2dba12aee15ffd460b9
Message ID: <9304131515.AA13826@soda.berkeley.edu>
Reply To: <9304130517.AA24164@toad.com>
UTC Datetime: 1993-04-13 15:18:34 UTC
Raw Date: Tue, 13 Apr 93 08:18:34 PDT
From: Eric Hughes <hughes@soda.berkeley.edu>
Date: Tue, 13 Apr 93 08:18:34 PDT
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Security Dynamics
In-Reply-To: <9304130517.AA24164@toad.com>
Message-ID: <9304131515.AA13826@soda.berkeley.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Re: checking distribution in 10^4 samples
>their simulations were based on five to ten runs, with 10^7 updates
>per run. they aren't precise about the exact number of random
>numbers needed, at least not in this paper, but i assume it's in the
>order of one per update, in which case 10,000 would not be enough.
The method of randomness-checking done here is to run a physical
simulation with the random numbers. Direct statistical methods are
much more efficient.
Eric
Return to April 1993
Return to “Peter Honeyman <honey@citi.umich.edu>”