Reducing the footprint of a simple application

[Dr Paul Dale]

Jakob,

That's reasonable, although I wouldn't use the word "low" to describe it.
I did try to include 10.1.2 from NIST's SP 800-90C but it didn't make it.

There is nothing preventing the use of the existing DRBGs with longer 
digests which Could increase number of bits.

Pauli

On 15/9/21 11:34 pm, Jakob Bohm via openssl-users wrote:
> On 2021-09-14 12:14, Dr Paul Dale wrote:
>>
>>
>> > ...low security RNGs and other antifeatures.
>>
>> Huh????  Where?  Why plural?
>>
>> The only **one** I'm aware of is the one I added to stochastically 
>> flush the property cache where it doesn't need to be 
>> cryptographically secure.
>>
> Some applications need more than 256 independent random bits to 
> satisfy their
> security design.  Some of the newer RNGs in OpenSSL presume otherwise 
> in their
> government design.
>
>
> Enjoy
>
> Jakob