ok - I just read part of the paper. I'm not a cryptographer but I am a
mathemetician and here are some trivial conclusions.
the algorithm is looking for a number: N where N=p*q for two primes p and
q of relatively the same size.
If you look at the _original_ equations developed by Pohlig-Hellm
Brian Snyder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Why, when the de-facto standard of internet development/protocol work is to
> use open (royalty-free) protocols, did the world of SSL seem to standardize
> on a patented algorithm such as SSL. I mean SSL is totally out there for
> the world to use, but t
t...
-brian
> -Original Message-
> From: Geoff Thorpe [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, May 10, 2000 9:16 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: RSA Patent Issues... interesting article...
>
>
> Hi there,
>
> On Wed, 10 May 2000, Vin McLellan wro
Geoff Thorpe wrote:
> Which leaves
> the mathematical consideration of the multi-prime keys themselves, and
> their generation, to be debated (ie. I doubt the patent could rest on an
> argument that it is a physical process, or an implementation invention,
> because that should bang its head on t
Brian Snyder wrote:
>
>
> In short, this article only applies to SSL embedded clients, and that RSA is
> legal to use to authenticate a signature to a web server (who have paid the
> license fee)... in an embedded SSL client, the client doesnt really use RSA
> for encryption of data. In anycase
Hi there,
On Wed, 10 May 2000, Vin McLellan wrote:
> > http://www.cyberlaw.com/rsa.html
good read, it got my brain chewing anyway. :-)
> The RSA guys, for whom I have been a consultant for many years, got a
> bitter laugh out of it. They said, basically, that Flinn had tried out the
> s
_Vin
-Original Message-
Brian Snyder wrote:
>Hi all. Alot of talk has gone back and forth about RSA patent
>issues. Daniel van der Zee pointed this site out to me in some
>private email (thanx), and I was curious how experienced poeple
> here interpret
Douglas Wikström <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> asked for a more detailed description of
the MultiPrime RSApkc technique than the RSA press release on RSA's
licensing agreement with Compaq:
http://www.rsasecurity.com/news/pr/000411-1.html
Try:
http://www.tandem.com/brfs_wps/esscptt
Lutz Jaenicke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Thu, May 04, 2000 at 10:39:05AM +0100, Mark J Cox wrote:
> > > Which is about to expire in a few months, if I remember correctly :-)
> >
> > Then we get into the new MultiPrimes patent instead. For details:
> > http://www.apacheweek.com/issues/00-0
On Thu, May 04, 2000 at 10:39:05AM +0100, Mark J Cox wrote:
> > Which is about to expire in a few months, if I remember correctly :-)
>
> Then we get into the new MultiPrimes patent instead. For details:
> http://www.apacheweek.com/issues/00-04-21#rsa2000
Well, but then, who cares?
The Multi
> Which is about to expire in a few months, if I remember correctly :-)
Then we get into the new MultiPrimes patent instead. For details:
http://www.apacheweek.com/issues/00-04-21#rsa2000
Mark
Mark J Cox, .. www.awe.com/mark
Apache Software Foundation .
2000.
> Can I just not use their algorithms and still use OpenSSL and if so how
> would I do that. Is there any helpful up-to-date source of information
about
> this topic? And what other patent issues have to be taken into account in
> the US in relation with OpenSSL? Thanks.
One approac
OpenSSL so far is patent free and probably will remain generally so unless
some hotshot chooses to try to patent something which has already been
done - but they don't know about. This has happened - I have examples.
RSA's stuff is patented in the US only and it expires as you say in Sept.
Thus
o how
would I do that. Is there any helpful up-to-date source of information about
this topic? And what other patent issues have to be taken into account in
the US in relation with OpenSSL? Thanks.
Stefan Schmidt
__
OpenSSL Pr
14 matches
Mail list logo
