Ruby Bug: SecureRandom should try /dev/urandom first

Re:Ruby Bug: SecureRandom should try /dev/urandom first by forgotpwtomain on Thursday May 05, 2016 @07:41AM (#11635227)

> as opposed to one of the NIST's DRBG

I certainly wouldn't go anywhere near another NIST DRBG..

> https://eprint.iacr.org/2006/438

From my brief understanding Aumasson's paper uses a different seeding routine from the example provided in the c implementation which allows the weaker states to be produced - indeed it's mentioned on the author's website.

> Finally, why is deterministic PRNG suggested as a replacement for OpenSSL's random number generator? In general, the advice to write your own userspace PRNG replacement for OpenSSL is not a good advice, because many people are not competent enough to do it.

If you read my above post I clearly do not suggest this.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Ruby Bug: SecureRandom should try /dev/urandom first by dchest on Friday May 06, 2016 @05:57AM (#11642781)

> I certainly wouldn't go anywhere near another NIST DRBG..

OK, this is an instant red-flag to me to get out of the conversation.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Ruby Bug: SecureRandom should try /dev/urandom first by forgotpwtomain on Friday May 06, 2016 @10:35PM (#11648101)

> OK, this is an instant red-flag to me to get out of the conversation.

Perhaps you are unfamiliar with? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dual_EC_DRBG

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Ruby Bug: SecureRandom should try /dev/urandom first by dchest on Saturday May 07, 2016 @04:20AM (#11648831)

I'm familiar with it. CTR DRBG, Hash DRBG, HMAC DRBG are all fairly solid designs.

[ Parent | on HN ]