CARVIEW

MOTORHOMES

Select Language

HTTP/2 200 date: Wed, 16 Jul 2025 06:02:42 GMT content-type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 content-encoding: gzip set-cookie: PHPSESSID=f5refqhbd94l57ompvsp1a67mm; path=/ expires: Thu, 19 Nov 1981 08:52:00 GMT cache-control: no-store, no-cache, must-revalidate pragma: no-cache vary: Accept-Encoding strict-transport-security: max-age=31536000; includeSubDomains x-frame-options: SAMEORIGIN x-xss-protection: 1; mode=block x-content-type-options: nosniff cf-cache-status: DYNAMIC server: cloudflare cf-ray: 95ff4ac899393585-BLR alt-svc: h3=":443"; ma=86400 RFC Errata Report » RFC Editor

RFC Errata

Errata Search
RFC Number:		Errata ID:

Source of RFC		Status:
Area Acronym:		Type:
WG Acronym:		Submitter Name:
Other:		Date Submitted:
Summary Table Full Records

RFC 4086, "Randomness Requirements for Security", June 2005

Source of RFC: IETF - NON WORKING GROUP
Area Assignment: sec

Errata ID: 3105
Status: Held for Document Update
Type: Technical
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: Florian Weimer
Date Reported: 2012-02-05
Held for Document Update by: Sean Turner

Section 6.2.2 says:

   If one uses no more than the:

         log  ( log  ( s  ) )
            2      2    i

   low-order bits, then predicting any additional bits from a sequence
   generated in this manner is provably as hard as factoring n.

It should say:

(see below)

Notes:

As noted by Koblitz and Menezes in "Another look at provable security II", <https://eprint.iacr.org/2006/229.pdf>, this recommendation is based on a misinterpretation of the big-O notation. The claim about provable security is therefore misleading.

Report New Errata

Original Source | Taken Source

Search RFCs

RFC Editor

The Series

For Authors

Sponsor

RFC Errata

Errata Search

RFC 4086, "Randomness Requirements for Security", June 2005