From: wichita@cyberstation.net
Date: Wed, 11 Dec 1996 01:47:11 -0800 (PST)
To: "Igor Chudov @ home" <ichudov@algebra.com>
Subject: Re: IPG algorithim
In-Reply-To: <199611302127.PAA14989@manifold.algebra.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.BSI.3.95.961211034239.11832H-100000@citrine.cyberstation.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain




On Sat, 30 Nov 1996, Igor Chudov @ home wrote:

> Eric Murray wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > I have translated the IPG algorithim's "engine" to C, to generate
> > some random values from it for testing purposes.  It does not
> > look very random in either the xnoisesph program or the DIEHARD
> > test battery.   However I may well have misinterprested Mr. Wood's
> > description (his writing is, as Mr. Chudov points out, difficult to
> > understand) or written my code incorrectly.  Here it is, play
> > with it yourself.  To my untrained eye the lack of randomness
> > in what's essentially a stream cipher would be disturbing.
> > However I am not a cryptoanalysist so I do not know to
> > what extent this weakens the cipher.
> 
> Thanks for an interestnig approach to testing (see below).
> 
> > The IPG description does not say (but implies to me) that
> > the various tables that are to be filled in by "random" values must
> > be filled in by PRNGs that are seeded with the same seeds by
> > each of the party that knows the key.  Otherwise the "encryptor
> > streams" that are generated will be unrelated and decryption will not
> > be possible.  To make my test work I have used the simple rand()
> > function to fill in the tables.
> 
> A good point.
> 
> > Corrections are welcome.
> 
> see below.
>  
> > 
> > #include <stdio.h>
> > 
> > /* a C translation of the IPG "EUREKA" algorithim's "engine".
> > ** This is supposed to produce random numbers for the IPG
> > ** "encryptor stream".
> > ** See http://www.netprivacy.com/ for the original description.
> > ** Eric Murray  ericm@lne.com  This code placed under GNU copyleft.  */
> > 
> > /* machine-dependent stuff, change to suit different platforms: */
> > typedef unsigned char byte;
> > typedef unsigned short uint16;
> > 
> > 
> > /* tables: */
> > uint16 A[53];
> > uint16 B[53];
> > uint16 C[53];
> > 
> > 
> > int init_table(uint16*table, uint16 min, uint16 max)
> > {
> > 	/* IPG specifies no algorithim for producing the "random"
> > 	** initial values in the ABC tables, but it's obvious that
> > 	** it requires a PRNG that's somehow seeded from the "key".
> > 	** I've just used rand() here.  In UNIX rand() called with no
> > 	** seed is supposed to seed itself with 0. */
> > 	int i;
> > 	int count, r;
> > 
> > 	for(i = 0; i < 53; i++) {
> > 		table[i] = min + (rand() % (max - min));
> > 	}
> > }
> > 
> > main(int argc, char **argv)
> > {
> > 	uint16 jv;
> > 	int argcnt, i, n, count, diehard, nelem;
> > 
> > 	diehard = 0;
> > 	argcnt = 1;
> 
> how about doing randomize()?
> 
> > 	if (argc >= 2) {
> > 		if (strncmp(argv[argcnt],"-d") == 0) {
> > 			diehard++;
> > 			argcnt++;
> > 		}
> > 	}
> > 	if (argc > argcnt - 1 ) {
> > 		n = atoi(argv[argcnt]);
> > 		fprintf(stderr,"Generating %d values\n",n);
> > 	}
> > 	else {
> > 		n = 2000;
> > 	}
> > 
> > 	/* seed tables: */
> > 	fprintf(stderr,"Seeding:  A");  fflush(stderr);
> > 	init_table(A,0,65535);
> > 	fprintf(stderr," B");  fflush(stderr);
> > 	init_table(B,0,12227);
> > 	fprintf(stderr," C");  fflush(stderr);
> > 	init_table(C,16384,20361);
> > 	fprintf(stderr,"\n");  fflush(stderr);
> > 
> > 	/* generate n values: */
> > 	for(; n > 0; n--) {
> > 		/* jv is "random" (where's it seeded from?) */
> > 		jv = (uint16)(rand() % 53);
> > 
> > 		/* count limits the number of traverses to 53^2 so we don't get stuck */
> > 		for(count = 0; count < 2809; count++) {
> 
> 2809 is a too small limit. For example, if ALL B == 1, A == 16385, and 
> C == 20361, the loop may need (20361-16385) passes to get to the < 16384
> value.
> 
> Again, if all A = 16385, all B = 0, all C = 16386, the loop will never 
> end with a correct A (your code reflects that).
> 
> > 			jv++;
> > 			if (jv == 53) jv = 0;
> > 			A[jv] = (A[jv] + B[jv]) % C[jv];
> > 			if (A[jv] < 16384) break;
> > 		}
> > 		if (count == 2809) fprintf(stderr,"Oops.\n");
> > 		else {
> > 			if (!diehard) {
> > 				printf("%d\n",A[jv]);
> > 			}
> > 			else {
> > 				/* print output in DIEHARD required format:
> > 				** actually since we have 16-bit ints and DIEHARD
> > 				** wants 32-bit ints, we print 20 per line instead of 10 */
> > 				if (nelem++ > 19) {printf("\n"); nelem = 0;}
> > 				printf("%4.4x",(unsigned int)A[jv]);
> > 			}
> > 		}
> > 	}
> > }
> > 
> > 
> 
> You are also bringing a good point that Chi-squared tests are not
> sufficient to make any conclusions about usefulness of this particular
> pseudo random number generator.
> 
> 	- Igor.
> 
Chi Squares alone are not sufficient but we are only talking about the
seed algorithm, and at our web sites, you will find Standard Deviations,
Chi Squares, Delta ICs, autocorrelations, cross correlations, and a
variety of other tests done on single characters, couplets - pairs,
first differences, second differences, offset differences and all kinds of
other tests.