[Cryptography] /dev/random is not robust

[Stephan Neuhaus]

On 2013-10-16 19:58, Jerry Leichter wrote:
> I'm amazed and disturbed by the nature of the responses to this
> paper. [...]  This paper is a step along a
> path begun in 2005 by Barak and Halevi (the instant paper has
> extensive references), and, frankly, it's about time.

It should also be a step along a path begun in 1998 and continued in
2000 by Peter Gutmann.  /dev/random is among those that are analysed
(obviously as it was in 2000).
http://www.cypherpunks.to/~peter/06_random.pdf

Fun,

Stephan

[PS: This email will not make it to the list. I have forgotten the email
address under which I am subscribed and can't be arsed to find out right
now.]