1998-08-07 - Re: Noise source processing

Header Data

From: “Enzo Michelangeli” <em@who.net>
To: <honig@sprynet.com>
Message Hash: 7d9b4810d01c5dfe38f66c673400a73c1b1d965014e8a3f7ee721124334af397
Message ID: <00be01bdc19d$e74dbe20$88004bca@home>
Reply To: N/A
UTC Datetime: 1998-08-07 00:53:17 UTC
Raw Date: Thu, 6 Aug 1998 17:53:17 -0700 (PDT)

Raw message

From: "Enzo Michelangeli" <em@who.net>
Date: Thu, 6 Aug 1998 17:53:17 -0700 (PDT)
To: <honig@sprynet.com>
Subject: Re: Noise source processing
Message-ID: <00be01bdc19d$e74dbe20$88004bca@home>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain

-----Original Message-----
From: mgraffam@mhv.net <mgraffam@mhv.net>
Date: Friday, August 07, 1998 4:14 AM

>> Interestingly, the parity of a $10 10year old Radio shack monophonic
>> FM radio, UNSHIELDED, in a digitally-noisy environment, sampled
>> at 44Khz and 16 bits, passed Diehard.
>Yeah, that is pretty neat .. maybe I'll tear the shielding off of my
>source and see what sort of results I get. Maybe the shielding I
>put in place is unnecessary.

Hmmm... IMHO, it just means that you can't rely on statistic tests
alone in order to measure entropy content. In fact, you can't measure it at
all: you can only set upper bounds, but, sadly, no lower bounds.
Remember: also pi's digits would pass DIEHARD, and an external attacker
could well inject such kind of EMI into an unshielded receiver.