[dsfjdssdfsd] what not to do...

Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie> Tue, 01 April 2014 17:10 UTC

Return-Path: <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
X-Original-To: dsfjdssdfsd@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dsfjdssdfsd@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C36B11A0996 for <dsfjdssdfsd@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 1 Apr 2014 10:10:51 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.91
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.91 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id jhonJO15sq2n for <dsfjdssdfsd@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 1 Apr 2014 10:10:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mercury.scss.tcd.ie (mercury.scss.tcd.ie []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AD97A1A088C for <dsfjdssdfsd@ietf.org>; Tue, 1 Apr 2014 10:10:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by mercury.scss.tcd.ie (Postfix) with ESMTP id E276EBE51 for <dsfjdssdfsd@ietf.org>; Tue, 1 Apr 2014 18:10:46 +0100 (IST)
Received: from mercury.scss.tcd.ie ([]) by localhost (mercury.scss.tcd.ie []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 7tfhGFLZ4O4W for <dsfjdssdfsd@ietf.org>; Tue, 1 Apr 2014 18:10:46 +0100 (IST)
Received: from [] (stephen-think.dsg.cs.tcd.ie []) by mercury.scss.tcd.ie (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C0E7BBE47 for <dsfjdssdfsd@ietf.org>; Tue, 1 Apr 2014 18:10:46 +0100 (IST)
Message-ID: <533AF317.5070901@cs.tcd.ie>
Date: Tue, 01 Apr 2014 18:10:47 +0100
From: Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: dsfjdssdfsd@ietf.org
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.6
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dsfjdssdfsd/HCC0IiCH-ui0oOET-YzhR9Iya3U
Subject: [dsfjdssdfsd] what not to do...
X-BeenThere: dsfjdssdfsd@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: "The dsfjdssdfsd list provides a venue for discussion of randomness in IETF protocols, for example related to updating RFC 4086." <dsfjdssdfsd.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dsfjdssdfsd>, <mailto:dsfjdssdfsd-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dsfjdssdfsd/>
List-Post: <mailto:dsfjdssdfsd@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dsfjdssdfsd-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dsfjdssdfsd>, <mailto:dsfjdssdfsd-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 01 Apr 2014 17:10:52 -0000


Looking at the traffic on this list I wondered if it'd
be an idea to try document the things implementers should
not do with (P)RNGs or to generate random (sets of:-)

It seems like there's a lot of knowledge on that spread
about and if there was someone was willing and able maybe
an informational RFC about mistakes that have been made
and how implementers can avoid 'em might be useful.

Whatcha think?

Or maybe that'd just generate endless debate and offer
no useful guidance?

Or maybe there's a survey paper out there somewhere
or thesis that already has a load of that material?