Timeline for Cryptographic random numbers for key generation
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
16 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 12, 2015 at 17:08 | vote | accept | Ruben | ||
| Aug 12, 2015 at 8:31 | comment | added | ddddavidee | @RichieFrame thank you. If you could post a link in a comment I would be glad. Thanks a lot in advance. | |
| Aug 11, 2015 at 20:54 | comment | added | Richie Frame | @ddddavidee while my implementation is private (with integrated health checks) and designed to interoperate with my other crypto code, the design spec is not, I will post later to sci.crypt under a title starting with "Project Purple" | |
| Aug 11, 2015 at 11:44 | comment | added | ddddavidee | @RichieFrame very interesting. is your wrapper for your private use or free to use? | |
| Aug 11, 2015 at 8:23 | history | edited | Ruben | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
deleted 229 characters in body
|
| Aug 10, 2015 at 14:52 | answer | added | Yehuda Lindell | timeline score: 1 | |
| Aug 10, 2015 at 6:54 | comment | added | Richie Frame | Many cryptographic libraries utilize the operating system RNG, which you may or may not trust, I wrote a wrapper around the OS RNG specifically for key generation, under the assumption that it is possible to compromise the OS RNG to generate poor entropy or predictable values | |
| Aug 10, 2015 at 6:19 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/#!/StackCrypto/status/630624470760341504 | ||
| Aug 10, 2015 at 6:03 | history | edited | otus | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
make the title more specific
|
| Aug 10, 2015 at 0:15 | comment | added | Maarten Bodewes♦ | That's the one for OpenSSL. Note that I've come to understand that - depending on the platform - OpenSSL's random functions may be tricky to trust. | |
| Aug 9, 2015 at 22:39 | comment | added | Ruben | Ah, I should have read the wikipedia page more carefully. Shame I only read it after I posted the question. Apearently it is not useful to pick strong primes and one should pick large enough primes instead, see crypto.stackexchange.com/questions/1151/…. Can you provide a little more information about Fortuna? Why do you name that one? Is it the most commonly used CSPRNG, or the one that OpenSSL uses? | |
| Aug 9, 2015 at 21:46 | comment | added | SEJPM | CSPENG: Fortuna. IIRC "big enough" means something around twice the length of the security level. You don't need strong primes, random primes are kina likely to be strong (enough) primes but you're on the safe side if you use them. | |
| Aug 9, 2015 at 21:39 | history | edited | e-sushi | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 13 characters in body
|
| Aug 9, 2015 at 21:16 | history | edited | Ruben | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 315 characters in body; edited title
|
| Aug 9, 2015 at 21:11 | review | First posts | |||
| Aug 10, 2015 at 6:03 | |||||
| Aug 9, 2015 at 21:09 | history | asked | Ruben | CC BY-SA 3.0 |