1993-11-09 - Re: PC random number hardware

Header Data

From: doug@netcom.com (Doug Merritt)
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Message Hash: 4a846c81e25c7cd9253bb93a9f8dd1e2fef5de9b8ba98fbabc650ef9125bc515
Message ID: <199311090616.WAA14018@mail.netcom.com>
Reply To: N/A
UTC Datetime: 1993-11-09 06:18:33 UTC
Raw Date: Mon, 8 Nov 93 22:18:33 PST

Raw message

From: doug@netcom.com (Doug Merritt)
Date: Mon, 8 Nov 93 22:18:33 PST
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: PC random number hardware
Message-ID: <199311090616.WAA14018@mail.netcom.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


jon@balder.us.dell.com (Jon Boede) said:
>Can anyone refute the claim that you can only generate truly random numbers
>using hardware?  I recall seeing a proof that totally random numbers could
>only be generated by an infinitely large program.

Assuming a bit of leeway in interpretation, this is trivially true
mathematically. There's a great von Neumann quote that goes something
like "anyone who uses finite state machines to generate supposedly
random numbers is, of course, living in a state of sin."

Use of hardware random number generation does not automatically confer
a state of grace, however. Such processes sample through an aperture
and are subject to the Nyquist limit, the General Uncertainty Principle,
and frequently the Central Limit Theorem as well, which is to say that
you still have to mind your p's and q's quite carefully.
	Doug





Thread