-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Jon Bennett
Sent: Tuesday, September 28, 1999 03:34 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: What US companies need to know about RSA
I think this is right on topic.
This discussion is why I am
On Tue, Sep 28, 1999 at 10:10:39PM -0500, Michael J. Markowitz wrote:
[...]
Another possibility you seem to have missed in your research is to
license an *independent* crypto library from a company that holds a PKP
license that allows it to sublicense it's "patent-dependent" code. g
Take ATT
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: What US companies need to know about RSA
HI!
Please, can we stop the off-topic discussion here?
We have enough to read all day.
Ciao, Michael.
__
OpenS
At 08:13 AM 9/29/99 -0700, CJ Holmes wrote:
Likewise, the conditions are unfavorable. Having licensed the algorithm
one is required to use RSAs implementation...
Again, that depends on from whom (or should I say through whom) you've
licensed the algorithm. A few companies do have a broad
EKR wrote:
Dr Stephen Henson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Whereas the current situation is that Netscape supports DSA cient
certificates in its browsers but MS doesn't at all. This doesn't help
with SSL though.
Especially since as of 4.6 the Netscape DSA client auth code
was broken. It
I'll speculate t the answer to this question is the same answer as to why IBM was so
successful selling mainframes for
decades. It was expalined to me this way: If you go out on a limb as a manager you
might make a breakthrough but the odds
are stacked against you. On the other hand if you
HI!
Please, can we stop the off-topic discussion here?
We have enough to read all day.
Ciao, Michael.
__
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
User Support Mailing List[EMAIL
-295-7700
E: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
W: www.rsa.com
-Original Message-
From: Leland V. Lammert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, September 24, 1999 7:46 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: David Lang
Subject: Re: What US companies need to know about RSA
At 04:31 PM 9/23/99 , B
I think this is right on topic.
This discussion is why I am on the list at all.
Michael Ströder wrote:
HI!
Please, can we stop the off-topic discussion here?
We have enough to read all day.
Ciao, Michael.
__
"Spector, Brian" wrote:
Greetings Lee,
Umm.
maybe we should talk. Maybe you should quit talking???...
So your mother raised a thief? You know stealing intellectual property is
the same as shoplifting your local Circle K? No distinction at all,
regardless of whatever rational
-Original Message-
From: Spector, Brian [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' [EMAIL PROTECTED];
'[EMAIL PROTECTED]' [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Monday, September 27, 1999 2:55 PM
Subject: RE: What US companies need to know about RSA
snip
So
At 01:09 PM 9/17/99 -0700, Aaron D. Turner wrote:
This RSA library license that you recieve with Stronghold, etc, can
not be legally transfered to another piece of software, because the
license requires you to use the RSA approved implimentation of the RSA
algorithm.
The other option is to
"Spector, Brian" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
You know stealing intellectual property is
the same as shoplifting your local Circle K? No distinction at all,
regardless of whatever rational argument you want to put behind it.
In this case, it's more like dumping tea in Boston Harbor. It's
David Lang [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
my question was really what options are available as part of #3 for things
like stunnel, or a SSL capable version of lynx or wget (command line way
to retreive a web page), or even just a SSL capable version of telnet.
There's "Safe Passage" by c2net, and also
This is getting slightly off-topic, but without risking it what options do
US companies have for items such as the SSLwrapper that was mentioned, or
other similar items.
David Lang
On Wed, 22 Sep 1999, Terrell Larson wrote:
Aaron,
In your situation I would not risk it either - I agree
David Lang [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
This is getting slightly off-topic, but without risking it what options do
US companies have for items such as the SSLwrapper that was mentioned, or
other similar items.
Option 1: Wait a year to let the patent expire.
Option 2: Use only DSA-based ciphers
my question was really what options are available as part of #3 for things
like stunnel, or a SSL capable version of lynx or wget (command line way
to retreive a web page), or even just a SSL capable version of telnet.
David Lang
On Thu, 23 Sep 1999, Bodo Moeller wrote:
David Lang [EMAIL
On Tue, 21 Sep 1999, Terrell Larson wrote:
Aaron,
My opinion on this is as follows (I'm not a lawyer but I've hired
a few for opinions). If you end up breaching the licence then RSA
will have the right to revoke it from your company without
compensation and secondly - they will have the
Aaron,
In your situation I would not risk it either - I agree that is simply is not worth it.
__
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
User Support Mailing List[EMAIL
Dave Neuer wrote:
RSADSI seem to have a propensity for casting information in a decidedly
pro-RSADSI light. Kind of like the way they convinced the IETF that the
licensing for RSA would always be "affordable and non-discriminatory."
Interestingly one of the RFCs says that the licence fee is
-Original Message-
From: Aaron D. Turner [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Stunnel Maillist [EMAIL PROTECTED];
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Friday, September 17, 1999 5:43 PM
Subject: What US companies need to know about RSA
After a lot of research and talking with people from
Well if you want to be illegal why bother downloading RSARef.
Also you cant legally donload it anymore because RSA doesnt
offer it for download anymore.
I asked them about it and tey said that i have to by BSAFE or any other
toolkits available fronm them. (I cant even afford buy Books, how the
On Mon, 20 Sep 1999, Dave Neuer wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Aaron D. Turner [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Stunnel Maillist [EMAIL PROTECTED];
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Friday, September 17, 1999 5:43 PM
Subject: What US companies need to know about RSA
After
Aaron D. Turner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, 20 Sep 1999, Dave Neuer wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Aaron D. Turner [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Stunnel Maillist [EMAIL PROTECTED];
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Friday, September 17, 1999 5:43 PM
Subject: What US
I would like to add one more piece to this puzzle. There is one
large set of potential U.S. users that can use RSA royalty-free; the
U.S. federal government.
Here are two references.
From the RSA FAQ, section 6.3.1
http://www.rsasecurity.com/rsalabs/faq/6-3-1.html
The U.S.
After a lot of research and talking with people from the Stunnel and
OpenSSL lists, and 3 phone calls to RSA itself, I've learned far more
than I ever wanted to know about RSA's patent and licensing. [Contrary
to the last person who posted on this list, I found both Stunnel and
OpenSSL lists
Well if you want to be illegal why bother downloading RSARef.
Also you cant legally donload it anymore because RSA doesnt
offer it for download anymore.
I asked them about it and tey said that i have to by BSAFE or any other
toolkits available fronm them. (I cant even afford buy Books, how the
27 matches
Mail list logo
