The possibility that there is a backdoor in one of the officially recommended random number generators (RNGs) used to create encryption keys, has caused two well-known encryption experts to declare the scheme to be useless.In a Wired article this week, Bruce Schneier of BT Counterpane launched a stinging attack on the elliptic curve-based Dual_EC_DRBG, one of four techniques RNG designs approved by the U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) in March of this year.Following on from a theoretical paper authored by Microsoft software engineers, Dan Shumow and Niels Ferguson, Schneier raises suspicions that the scheme has some kind of mathematically-significant backdoor put there by the U.S. National Security Agency (NSA), which in his view promoted its adoption by NIST.The controversy surrounds numbers used to define the algorithm’s elliptic curve from which RNGs are created, which appear to be derived from a second set of hidden numbers. This is the so-called ’backdoor’. “Of course, we have no way of knowing whether the NSA knows the secret numbers that break Dual_EC-DRBG. We have no way of knowing whether an NSA employee working on his own came up with the constants – and has the secret numbers. We don’t know if someone from NIST, or someone in the ANSI working group, has them. Maybe nobody does,” says Schneier.“We don’t know where the constants came from in the first place. We only know that whoever came up with them could have the key to this backdoor. And we know there’s no way for NIST – or anyone else – to prove otherwise. This is scary stuff indeed.” Phil Zimmermann, creator of PGP and Zfone, who himself famously clashed with the NSA in the early 1990s over an encryption backdoor called the Clipper Chip, was clear that the RNG in question should not be used by anyone for the time being.“You are always having to worry about backdoors,” he said. “There is something there that doesn’t look quite right. We should not use that random number generator,” he agreed.While the NSA is capable of introducing a backdoor, Zimmermann was unsure about its motivation for such an action.“It is actually very risky to put in a backdoor because somebody is going to find out,” he said.Anyone worried about the RNG should just ignore it and use one of the three others recommended by NIST, or abandon RNGs altogether in favour of alternatives such as block ciphers.“I tend not to favor random number generators because they consume too many processor cycles,” said Zimmermann. By John E. Dunn, Techworld.com Related content news North Korean hackers mix code from proven malware campaigns to avoid detection Threat actors are combining RustBucket loader with KandyKorn payload to effect an evasive and persistent RAT attack. By Shweta Sharma Nov 28, 2023 3 mins Malware feature How a digital design firm navigated its SOC 2 audit L+R's pursuit of SOC 2 certification was complicated by hardware inadequacies and its early adoption of AI, but a successful audit has provided security and business benefits. By Alex Levin Nov 28, 2023 11 mins Certifications Compliance news GE investigates alleged data breach into confidential projects: Report General Electric has confirmed that it has started an investigation into the data breach claims made by IntelBroker. By Shweta Sharma Nov 27, 2023 3 mins Data Breach opinion A year after ChatGPT’s debut, is GenAI a boon or the bane of the CISO’s existence? You can try to keep the flood of generative AI at bay but embracing it with proper vigilance is likely the best hope to maintain control and prevent the scourge of it becoming shadow AI. By Christopher Burgess Nov 27, 2023 6 mins Generative AI Data and Information Security Security Practices Podcasts Videos Resources Events SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTER From our editors straight to your inbox Get started by entering your email address below. Please enter a valid email address Subscribe