Hi,
Abel Luck wrote (28 Dec 2012 17:57:40 GMT) :
> Near the end it discusses HAVEGE with the startling point:
> "One of Peter's colleagues replaced the random
> input source employed by HAVEGE with a constant
> stream of ones. All of the same tests passed."
I think this tells more about the poor quality of the tests we have,
than about the quality of HAVEGE itself. This does not startle me.
Cheers,
--
intrigeri
| GnuPG key @ https://gaffer.ptitcanardnoir.org/intrigeri/intrigeri.asc
| OTR fingerprint @ https://gaffer.ptitcanardnoir.org/intrigeri/otr.asc
