Re: `Random' seed.

[m5@dev.tivoli.com (Mike McNally)]

Rick Busdiecker writes:
 > I don't think that anyone has suggested otherwise.  I believe that
 > `clock skew' was the underlying source of randomness that Matt Blaze
 > mentioned in the message where I first saw that code.

Yes, looking at Matt's code I think I believe it.

 > I have no idea how reasonable it would be to use this approach in
 > Netscape, however if it were available as an option to generate, say
 > 300 bits, I'd personally be plenty willing to let it chew up five
 > minutes while I get my morning caffeine.

If you look at it that way (the software just generates new bits every
once-in-a-while, like daily) I guess I wouldn't mind.  I mean, heck,
it's not like there aren't 3 dozen other random daemons that pop up
and eat my CPU every now and then :-)  It'd only really be a problem
if it were used as an "operational" source of random bits.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
| Nobody's going to listen to you if you just | Mike McNally (m5@tivoli.com) |
| stand there and flap your arms like a fish. | Tivoli Systems, Austin TX    |
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~