Vin McLellan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I suspect that RSA did send out more than a few nastygrams to OEMs
> or other mass marketeers about "illicit use" of RC4, but -- at least in
> recent years -- its complaints probably went to commercial enterprises which
> both (a) sought to resell the algorithm in the US, and (b) blatently used
> the RC4 label in a way that is likely to confuse many people as to the
> source of the RC4 implementation code.
Not so. I know of a firm that paid hundreds of thousands of dollars
to RSADSI in order to use their own entirely original implementation
of RC4, under direct threat of a bogus copyright lawsuit. They knew,
I think, that if RSADSI sued they'd lose, but they didn't fancy being
dragged into court.
This wasn't a crypto product, just an implementation of a standard
whose encryption option mandated RC4. I doubt any mention of RC4
would have been made in either the advertising or the documentation.
--
__
\/ o\ [EMAIL PROTECTED] Got a Linux strategy? \ /
/\__/ Paul Crowley http://www.hedonism.demon.co.uk/paul/ /~\
