== Unsourced statement == 

 The article claims 
 :In discussing the one-time pad, two notions of security have to be kept distinct. The first is the perfect secrecy of the one-time pad system as proved by Shannon (Shannon security). The second is the security offered by state-of-the-art ciphers (e.g. AES) designed with principles learned in the long history of code breaking and subjected to extensive testing in a standardization process, either in public or by a top notch security service (empirical security).  The former is mathematically proven, subject to the practical availability of random numbers. The latter is unproven but relied upon by most governments to protect their most vital secrets (insofar as publicly known thus far)." 
 I would like to see a citation for this claim, especially the last sentence. Why should governments use any method other than OTP for their most vital secrets?  That governments use state-of-the-art-ciphers for this seems not plausible at all, given the fact that one runs a substantial risk of the cipher being broken, and storage capacities of even something as small as an USB stick that easily provide storage for random numbers in large enough quantity to allow for any practically conceivable application in environments where secrecy is vital, perhaps even where it is merely a desire.