[148276] in cryptography@c2.net mail archive
Re: [Cryptography] Lawyer: "Are you familiar with public key
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Phillip Hallam-Baker)
Tue Nov 26 13:14:26 2013
X-Original-To: cryptography@metzdowd.com
In-Reply-To: <20131126064906.GM761@mournblade.imrryr.org>
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2013 13:00:24 -0500
From: Phillip Hallam-Baker <hallam@gmail.com>
To: "cryptography@metzdowd.com" <cryptography@metzdowd.com>
Errors-To: cryptography-bounces+crypto.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@metzdowd.com
--===============0764079592458401809==
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c342ec38857704ec1841f5
--001a11c342ec38857704ec1841f5
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
On Tue, Nov 26, 2013 at 1:49 AM, Viktor Dukhovni
<cryptography@dukhovni.org>wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 12:17:31PM +0100, Eugen Leitl wrote:
>
> > Taking a bet on Whit Diffie, as the trial against "patent troll" TQP
> wraps up
> > Monday.
>
> Too bad they lost for now.
>
> It seems to me (IANAL) that if TQP has a valid claim with SSL +
> RC4 that is essentially based on RC4 being a stream cipher (the
> SSL part seems irrelevant) then they'd have a valid claim on
> Vigenere. That prior art is 460 years old.
>
> There I think no need to show that you need PKI to enable E-commerce,
> and RC4 alone is not sufficient. Even if symmetric crypto were
> sufficient, there's nothing in TQP's claims that applies to RC4
> alone that hasn't been known for nearly 500 years.
>
> It is rather sad that TQP is getting away with this.
>
I did rather worry when I saw the Plaintiff's counsel's line of
questioning. It is the sort of thing that can be really damaging.
I have been in the same situation (only over the invention of Web Mail
which is rather less consequential than Public Key Crypto). And the result
was I ended up as a paid witness for that very specific part of the case
rather than an expert witness explaining email technology in general.
--
Website: http://hallambaker.com/
--001a11c342ec38857704ec1841f5
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<div dir=3D"ltr"><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><div class=3D"gmail_quote">On T=
ue, Nov 26, 2013 at 1:49 AM, Viktor Dukhovni <span dir=3D"ltr"><<a href=
=3D"mailto:cryptography@dukhovni.org" target=3D"_blank">cryptography@dukhov=
ni.org</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1p=
x #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div class=3D"im">On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 12=
:17:31PM +0100, Eugen Leitl wrote:<br>
<br>
> Taking a bet on Whit Diffie, as the trial against "patent troll&q=
uot; TQP wraps up<br>
> Monday.<br>
<br>
</div>Too bad they lost for now.<br>
<br>
It seems to me (IANAL) that if TQP has a valid claim with SSL +<br>
RC4 that is essentially based on RC4 being a stream cipher (the<br>
SSL part seems irrelevant) then they'd have a valid claim on<br>
Vigenere. =A0That prior art is 460 years old.<br>
<br>
There I think no need to show that you need PKI to enable E-commerce,<br>
and RC4 alone is not sufficient. =A0Even if symmetric crypto were<br>
sufficient, there's nothing in TQP's claims that applies to RC4<br>
alone that hasn't been known for nearly 500 years.<br>
<br>
It is rather sad that TQP is getting away with this.<br></blockquote><div><=
br></div><div>I did rather worry when I saw the Plaintiff's counsel'=
;s line of questioning. It is the sort of thing that can be really damaging=
.=A0</div>
</div><div><br></div><div>I have been in the same situation (only over the =
invention of Web Mail which is rather less consequential than Public Key Cr=
ypto). And the result was I ended up as a paid witness for that very specif=
ic part of the case rather than an expert witness explaining email technolo=
gy in general.</div>
<div><br></div>-- <br>Website: <a href=3D"http://hallambaker.com/">http://h=
allambaker.com/</a><br>
</div></div>
--001a11c342ec38857704ec1841f5--
--===============0764079592458401809==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
_______________________________________________
The cryptography mailing list
cryptography@metzdowd.com
http://www.metzdowd.com/mailman/listinfo/cryptography
--===============0764079592458401809==--
