--
Does SPEKE claim to patent any uses of zero knowledge
proof of possession of the password for mutual
authentication, or just some particular method for
establishing communications? Is there any way around
the SPEKE patent for mutual authentication and
establishing secure communications on
http://mathworld.wolfram.com/news/2005-11-08/rsa-640/
--Steven M. Bellovin, http://www.cs.columbia.edu/~smb
-
The Cryptography Mailing List
Unsubscribe by sending unsubscribe cryptography to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From:
http://mathworld.wolfram.com/news/2005-11-08/rsa-640
November 8, 2005--A team at the German Federal Agency
for Information Technology Security (BSI) recently
announced the factorization of the 193-digit number
310 7418240490 0437213507 5003588856 7930037346
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], James A. Donald writes:
--
Does SPEKE claim to patent any uses of zero knowledge
proof of possession of the password for mutual
authentication, or just some particular method for
establishing communications? Is there any way around
the SPEKE patent for mutual
Steven M. Bellovin [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
http://mathworld.wolfram.com/news/2005-11-08/rsa-640/
There are timing details in:
http://www.crypto-world.com/announcements/rsa640.txt
They claim they need 5 months of 80 machines with 2.2GHz processors.
Using these numbers, I think it would be
--- begin forwarded text
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2005 10:50:05 -0500
To: Philodox Clips List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: R. A. Hettinga [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [Clips] Sony BMG's DRM provider does not rule out future use of
stealth
Reply-To: [EMAIL
On Wed, Nov 09, 2005 at 05:27:12PM +0100, Simon Josefsson wrote:
I'm not sure translating complexity into running time is reasonable,
but pending other ideas, this is a first sketch.
It is not reasonable, because the biggest constraint is memory, not
CPU. Inverting the matrix requires
Victor Duchovni [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Wed, Nov 09, 2005 at 05:27:12PM +0100, Simon Josefsson wrote:
I'm not sure translating complexity into running time is reasonable,
but pending other ideas, this is a first sketch.
It is not reasonable, because the biggest constraint is memory,
You may want to look at EAP-PAX. We tried to engineer around the
patent land mines in the field when we designed it. This of course
doesn't mean that someone won't claim it infringes on something.
We also have a proof (not yet published) of security in a random
oracle model.
Best, Bill
On 4 Nov 2005, at 5:23 PM, Travis H. wrote:
For example, pgp doesn't hide the key IDs of the addressees.
But OpenPGP does. Here's an extract fro RFC 2440:
5.1. Public-Key Encrypted Session Key Packets (Tag 1)
[...]
An implementation MAY accept or use a Key ID of zero as a wild
card
10 matches
Mail list logo