Larry,

Please note that any responses to your question "Are any of these encryption 
algorithms patented?" are being provided by individuals in the spirit of 
helpfulness and open sharing of information.  Neither IETF nor the IETF Trust 
provide assurances or advice as to whether or not technology covered by IETF 
standards are covered by patent claims.  The exclusive mechanism for soliciting 
and disclosing patent claims within the context of IETF activity is specified 
in RFC 3979, as we have discussed before.  Please do not take anyone's efforts 
to respond to your questions as "official" IETF positions, as they are not and 
may not be relied upon as such.

Regards,
Jorge


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Steven M. Bellovin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Saturday, January 20, 2007 6:28 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; ietf@ietf.org; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: MUST implement AES-CBC for IPsec ESP
> 
> 
> On Sat, 20 Jan 2007 14:45:26 -0800
> "Lawrence Rosen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
> > > > For ESP encryption algorithms, the document that was 
> sent out for
> > > > Last Call contains the following table:
> > > >
> > > >       Requirement    Encryption Algorithm (notes)
> > > >       -----------    --------------------
> > > >       MUST           NULL (1)
> > > >       MUST-          TripleDES-CBC [RFC2451]
> > > >       SHOULD+        AES-CBC with 128-bit keys [RFC3602]
> > > >       SHOULD         AES-CTR [RFC3686]
> > > >       SHOULD NOT     DES-CBC [RFC2405] (3)
> > > >
> > > > The Last Call comment suggests changing the "SHOULD+" 
> for AES-CBC
> > > > to "MUST."
> > 
> > Are any of these encryption algorithms patented?
> > 
> 
> Almost certainly not.  DES was patented, but the patent was never
> enforced; it has long since expired.  (Trivia: IBM filed a statement
> saying that DES was royalty-free *if* used in one of the 
> NIST-approvedd
> modes of operation.  But they never went after anyone who used it in
> other ways.)  To my knowledge, 3DES was never patented; even if it had
> been, it was first publicly described in 1979, so I doubt that any
> patent would still be valid.
> 
> AES itself had to be unencumbered; see
> http://csrc.nist.gov/CryptoToolkit/aes/pre-round1/aes_9709.htm#sec2d .
> The designers of Rijndael never even attempted to patent it; see the
> text quoted in RFC 3602 or the old Rijndael home page.
> 
> CBC dates from at least 1980 -- I seem to recall 1978, but I 
> don't have
> a citation handy.
> 
> That leaves CTR mode.  I doubt very much that it's patented, 
> since it's
> been very well known for many years and NIST rarely standardizes
> patented algorithms in this space (which I know you appreciate...).
> However, I don't have any citations to prove this negative.
> 
> 
>               --Steve Bellovin, http://www.cs.columbia.edu/~smb
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Ietf mailing list
> Ietf@ietf.org
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
> 

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

Reply via email to