Paul D. Robertson wrote
> I'm not sure exactly what the legality of usage is, I'm not a lawyer and I
> don't play one on the Net. I *do* know that both RSA and IDEA are
> patented algorithms in the US, and I've done my best to avoid ever
> installing them on an employer's machine.
I am aware of the patent, but don't know if it applies to non commercial
use.
that was y question
For commercial use, as far as I know, there are possibilities to
"negociate" a symbolic cost, but I really am not aware of the details.
>I thought (but don't quote me,
> unfortunately I don't have time to research it) IDEA was patented by a
> European company.
according to http://www.ascom.ch/infosec/idea/policy.html it seems patented
both in europe
(Austria, France, Germany, Italy, Netherlands, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland,
United Kingdom) and in the US, with exp around 2010/2011. so we're out of
luck!
one better goes with twofish or stays with that old DES until AES replaces
it...
>
> <rant>
> Vin never answered the "Why is BSAFE the only way to implement RSA for
> small developers and even with that, ...
> ... No expensive crypto libraries,
> and even better no exhorbitantly expensive per-server licenses necessary.
>
a quiet nie analysis! I think they've lost a big market with low unit
revenue
just to get a smaller one with large unit amounts. sure it was a difficult
decision,
but it was probably a decisive one. note that export laws have certainly be
a non
considerable factor.
> I wonder if the competition will finally make RSA drop their licesing
> terms on BSAFE once the patent expires?
openssl is quie satisfactory, and the "open source fashion" is in its
favour.
so even if they drop their licensing terms, I'd stay with openssl...
-
[To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
"unsubscribe firewalls" in the body of the message.]
