Slashdot Mirror


Researchers Devise a Way To Generate Provably Random Numbers Using Quantum Mechanics (newatlas.com)

No random number generator you've ever used is truly, provably random. Until now, that is. Researchers have used an experiment developed to test quantum mechanics to generate demonstrably random numbers, which could come in handy for encryption. From a report: The method uses photons to generate a string of random ones and zeros, and leans on the laws of physics to prove that these strings are truly random, rather than merely posing as random. The researchers say their work could improve digital security and cryptography. The challenge for existing random number generators is not only creating truly random numbers, but proving that those numbers are random. "It's hard to guarantee that a given classical source is really unpredictable," says Peter Bierhorst, a mathematician at the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), where this research took place. "Our quantum source and protocol is like a fail-safe. We're sure that no one can predict our numbers." For example, random number algorithms often rely on a source of data which may ultimately prove predictable, such as atmospheric noise. And however complex the algorithm, it's still applying consistent rules. Despite these potential imperfections, these methods are relied on in the day-to-day encryption of data. This team's method, however, makes use of the properties of quantum mechanics, or what Einstein described as "spooky action at a distance." Further reading: Wired, LiveScience, and CNET.

6 of 139 comments (clear)

  1. Nice try "researchers" by CajunArson · · Score: 4, Funny

    You're not fooling me. It's well known that the NSA incorporated backdoors into the fabric of the universe when they subverted the big bang.

    --
    AntiFA: An abbreviation for Anti First Amendment.
  2. Re:First post by darkain · · Score: 4, Informative

    Obligatory XKCD reference for those that didn't get it: https://xkcd.com/221/

  3. TRNGs are common... by MrKevvy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It has already been established that thermal/shot component noise (most commonly from reversed diodes) is demonstrably statistically random and is based on quantum electrodynamic events.

    TRNGs (True Random Number Generators) using this principle have been around for a while embedded in some hardware such as the Intel 82802 firmware hub found on some Intel mainboards

    --
    -- Insert witty one-liner here. --
  4. Re:First post by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Obligatory Dilbert: http://dilbert.com/strip/2001-...

  5. Re:Woo Quantum, must be better... by Baloroth · · Score: 4, Interesting

    It is, and that's exactly how Intel's hardware-based random number generator in their CPUs works (so, yes, we have used a truly provably random source of RNGs... that is, if Intel is telling the truth about how it works). Another source of RNG is radioactive decay, though that's not terribly commonly used thanks to the hardware requirements. In this case, the article doesn't describe the source of randomess (aside from "correlations in superpositions", which could be anything from completely random to completely unrandom). It might not even be as random as they think it is (just being quantum is very much not enough), especially because they "improved their data" by only looking at sequences where the bits were almost perfectly uniformly 50/50 1 and 0, which is precisely not the right way to ensure good randomness: true random sequences usually don't obey uniformity, except in the limit as the length of the sequence goes to infinity, and requiring uniformity (or near-uniformity) in a "random" sequence reduces the entropy. That tells me they don't really understand randomness, which does not bode well for their claims.

    --
    "None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license." --John Milton
  6. Very Different from Maths Proof by Roger+W+Moore · · Score: 4, Insightful

    However, this is really no different than other mathematical proofs.

    No, it is very different from a mathematical proof. This proof relies on our understanding of quantum mechanics and photons. Mathematical proofs are far more fundamental in that they are true regardless of the properties of the universe you happen to be in at the time. That being said QM is one of the most accurately tested scientific laws there has ever been but, nevertheless, if an experiment tomorrow shows that it is wrong this "proof" might come crashing down.