Re: [TLS] RNG vs. PRNG

"Kemp, David P." <> Wed, 05 May 2010 13:10 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0B2C53A6BFA for <>; Wed, 5 May 2010 06:10:22 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.184
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.184 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.185, BAYES_50=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id kY6e-k-DOSxl for <>; Wed, 5 May 2010 06:10:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id AA00A3A6B5B for <>; Wed, 5 May 2010 06:10:19 -0700 (PDT)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Wed, 5 May 2010 09:09:36 -0400
Message-ID: <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Thread-Topic: [TLS] RNG vs. PRNG
Thread-Index: Acrr773tPJhaLpptSp6JHPlH5/gjVgAYZwBQ
References: <> <>
From: "Kemp, David P." <>
To: <>
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 05 May 2010 13:11:07.0843 (UTC) FILETIME=[6CB10930:01CAEC54]
Subject: Re: [TLS] RNG vs. PRNG
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: "This is the mailing list for the Transport Layer Security working group of the IETF." <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 05 May 2010 13:10:22 -0000

-----Original Message-----
From: Dean Anderson

> If the RNG is truely random, it can not be biased either. The bias is
> the introduction of a non-random input; and by definition, a true RNG
> has no non-random inputs. So a 'biased RNG' is just the discovery that
> the device once thought to be an RNG was not one after all.

Sophistry.  A television that has been fried by lightning is still a TV,
albeit a broken one.  A 'biased RNG' may generate no entropy at all, in
which case it is broken.  Or it may generate entropy along with bias
that can be conditioned out.  If I take a true, fully functioning RNG
and add a constant value to every number it produces, the output becomes
biased.  But that bias is easily removed.  Adding zero or a small amount
of entropy to a sequence containing entropy does not remove *any*
entropy from that sequence.

> I suspect the NSA most likely used PRNG's in Clipper because PRNGs
> practical to implement whereas RNGs are not. Or perhaps it was a
> altogether; Recall that Clipper was broken.  

Speaking from fact rather than uninformed speculation, RNGs are
practical to implement.

     c. Random Number Generator Test: Functional testing of ring
oscillators and
LFSR is performed.