3 comments

  • dang10 minutes ago
    Related ongoing thread:<p><i>Claude reveals ECDSA curve origins</i> - <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=50122800">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=50122800</a> - Oct 2026 (91 comments)
  • 2857161114 minutes ago
    &quot;This helps fill out a page of cryptographic history, and reinforces our confidence in these critical cryptographic primitives.&quot;<p>Typical Valsorda. Even the Anthropic article states the timestamps could have been selected and the whole thing could be a &quot;proof&quot; that the NSA does not have a magic number up their sleeve.
    • mswphd10 minutes ago
      why though? in particular if the NSA wanted to hide their nefarious intent here, why wouldn&#x27;t they use something stronger than an LCG so the question for how they&#x27;re generated remained open forever?
    • McGlockenshire4 minutes ago
      What&#x27;s more likely, the random calls were made at those times, or that someone changed the numbers to make it look like they were made at those times?<p>Only one of those requires a conspiracy theory-tainted brain to think up.
  • MisterTea35 minutes ago
    &gt; Turns out memory can play tricks on everyone: we now know they were instead generated with the POSIX-standard drand48 random number generator.<p>Or he lied to obfuscate the origin.
    • john_strinlai17 minutes ago
      it would have been <i>beneficial</i> to disclose the origin.<p>lying for obfuscation purposes makes zero sense given what we know now.