Thanks moxie for the very comprehensive response to Nadim's concerns. Sam.
On 29 Nov 2016 7:23 pm, "Moxie Marlinspike" <mo...@thoughtcrime.org> wrote: > > If there are any lingering IP questions around these documents: > > 1) Open Whisper Systems has not filed for any patents. > > 2) All Open Whisper Systems code is available under an open source license. > > 3) All of our specifications are placed in the public domain. > > 4) Open Whisper Systems welcomes third-party use of the terminology > we've used in these documents. > > Regarding the documents we published and the full Signal Protocol: > > As we previously stated, Signal Protocol includes multiparty, > multidevice, media, and authentication features built on top of the > elements we've recently documented. Signal Protocol is also a moving > target; we're continuing to make enhancements for new use cases and new > security features, and will continue doing so for the foreseeable > future. Once we've gotten more experience managing the documents we've > published thus far, we'll consider how to document these higher-level > elements and new features. > > We've made an effort to release standalone documents in order to make > these concepts easier to reuse by different projects with different > environments and constraints, and to avoid confusion between projects > using Signal-like mechanisms and the full Signal Protocol. > > Regarding use of the names "Signal" and "Signal Protocol": > > These documents provide the flexibility projects with different > constraints might need to implement something that works for them, so > there is a fair amount of leeway in terms of how they're used as well as > how they're combined and built upon. As a result, our preference is > that when people use what we've documented to construct their own > protocols, such creations use an independent name. > > For example, the SlickSecure Mesenger might use a protocol called > "Slick," and describe it as "Slick uses X3DH[ref] with such and such > encoding and such and such key types in such and such way. The output is > used to construct a Double Ratchet[ref] session in such and such way, > etc..." > > We want to maintain "Signal" and "Signal Protocol" as names associated > with up-to-date high-quality software, the latest protocol features, and > all the specific choices that we've made in implementing these concepts. > We've made those choices very carefully, we will continue to update > them carefully, and we want people to have confidence they will benefit > from that care when they see the word "Signal." > > The Signal trademark allow us to ensure that remains true; we hope to > develop a trademark licensing program in the near future, similar to > what the Linux Foundation does with Linux. In the meantime, definitely > get in touch if you want to use the name "Signal" to represent your app. > > Thanks, > > - moxie > > On 11/20/2016 01:18 PM, Trevor Perrin wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > A spec for the "Double Ratchet" algorithm is available at [1]. > > > > We'd welcome feedback, as usual. > > > > Trevor > > > > [1] https://whispersystems.org/docs/ > > _______________________________________________ > > Messaging mailing list > > Messaging@moderncrypto.org > > https://moderncrypto.org/mailman/listinfo/messaging > > > > -- > http://www.thoughtcrime.org > _______________________________________________ > Messaging mailing list > Messaging@moderncrypto.org > https://moderncrypto.org/mailman/listinfo/messaging >
_______________________________________________ Messaging mailing list Messaging@moderncrypto.org https://moderncrypto.org/mailman/listinfo/messaging
