Myths about /dev/urandom (2014)

Re:Myths about /dev/urandom (2014) by joelbondurant on Thursday January 05, 2017 @11:49PM (#13334037)

"And even if you need that peace of mind, let me tell you a secret: no practical attacks on AES, SHA-3 or other solid ciphers and hashes are known in the “unclassified” literature, either. Are you going to stop using those, as well? Of course not!"

http://www.pcworld.com/article/3117728/security/why-quantum-...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grover's_algorithm

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Myths about /dev/urandom (2014) by adrianN on Friday January 06, 2017 @03:56AM (#13334836)

Grover's algorithm, even assuming that we have hardware that can efficiently implement it, improves the runtime of a brute force attack on AES-256 from 10^49 * age of the universe to 10^10 * age of the universe. Hardly practical. All symmetric ciphers and all hashes are quantum-proof. Key exchange might become problematic, but that is a different problem

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Myths about /dev/urandom (2014) by Tomte on Friday January 06, 2017 @12:15AM (#13334140)

"Practical attacks". "Quantum computers".

I fail to see how these might be related.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Myths about /dev/urandom (2014) by joelbondurant on Friday January 06, 2017 @12:37AM (#13334216)

If you're working on storing cat videos on your personal website, I completely agree.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Myths about /dev/urandom (2014) by Tomte on Friday January 06, 2017 @02:40AM (#13334591)

No, I'm storing urandom articles on my personal website.

Cat videos are much too popular and a lot bigger, and since I'm paying for traffic... [0] ;-)

[0] regular traffic: ~30 MB/day, today (projected): ~3.5 GB

[ Parent | on HN ]