Re: /dev/random vs. /dev/urandom

[Paulo Marques <pmarques@grupopie.com>]

linux-os wrote:
> [...]
> One is free to use any number of samples. The short number of samples
> was DELIBERATELY used to exacerbate the problem although a number
> or nay-sayers jumped on this in an attempt to prove that I don't
> know what I'm talking about.

It seems to me that you actually don't.

Since this is a *uniform* distribution in the range [0..2^N[, than any 
of those N bits must also show a uniform distribution, or the 
distribution of the sum of the bits wouldn't be uniform. (isn't this 
obvious?)

It would be different of course, if this was not a uniform distribution, 
or the range was not a power of 2...

Of course, I agree that throwing away 5 bits in every byte of perfect 
entropy that the kernel worked so hard to gather is just wrong, but the 
randomness of the result is not the reason why.

> In the first place, the problem was to display the error of using
> an ANDing operation to truncate a random number. In the limit,
> one could AND with 0 and show that all randomness has been removed.

Not really.. you just get a perfect random uniform distribution if the 
range [0..0] :)

-- 
Paulo Marques - www.grupopie.com

"A journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step."
Lao-tzu, The Way of Lao-tzu