RFC Errata
Found 2 records.
Status: Reported (2)
RFC 4086, "Randomness Requirements for Security", June 2005
Source of RFC: IETF - NON WORKING GROUPArea Assignment: sec
Errata ID: 4960
Status: Reported
Type: Technical
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: Nikolai Malykh
Date Reported: 2017-03-09
Section 8.2.1 says:
If the adversary can command a highly parallel processor or a large network of work stations, 10^11 cycles per second is probably a minimum assumption today. Looking forward a few years, there should be at least an order of magnitude improvement. Thus, it is reasonable to assume that 10^10 keys could be checked per second, or 3.6*10^12 per hour or 6*10^14 per week, or 2.4*10^15 per month.
It should say:
If the adversary can command a highly parallel processor or a large network of work stations, 10^11 cycles per second is probably a minimum assumption today. Looking forward a few years, there should be at least an order of magnitude improvement. Thus, it is reasonable to assume that 10^10 keys could be checked per second, or 3.6*10^13 per hour or 8.6*10^14 per week, or 2.6*10^16 per month.
Notes:
Incorrect values.
Errata ID: 5386
Status: Reported
Type: Editorial
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: David Jonasson
Date Reported: 2018-06-08
Throughout the document, when it says:
[DoD] "Password Management Guideline", United States of
America, Department of Defense, Computer Security
Center, CSC-STD-002-85, April 1885.
It should say:
[DoD] "Password Management Guideline", United States of
America, Department of Defense, Computer Security
Center, CSC-STD-002-85, April 1985.
Notes:
This Informative Reference had the wrong century as publish date.
