Other Directory Sites: SeekWonder | Directory Owners Forum
The following archive was created by hippie-mail 7.98617-22 on Fri Aug 21 1998 - 17:20:58 ADT
Vin McLellan (vin@shore.net)
Tue, 28 Jul 1998 12:15:53 -0400
Vin <vin@shore.net> wrote:
>>Bruce Schneier summarized the situation in Applied
>>Cryptography II by saying, in effect, that the DSA is still clouded by
>>patent issues.
Kent Briggs <KDBriggs1@aol.com> replied:
>But Schneier also says this on p. 498 of AC2:
>
>"All of the various discrete-logarithm-based digital signature schemes have
>been put in one coherent framework. In my opinion this finally puts to rest
>any patent dispute between Schnorr and DSA: DSA is not a derivative of
>Schnorr, nor even of ElGamal. All three are examples of this general
>construction, and this general construction is unpatented."
Teach me to paraphrase Bruce from memory on this List!
Actually, I had just read the paper Claus Schorr submitted to the
IEEE in March. I don't think I had ever seen him or anyone else make the
argument before -- although, of course, I had heard of it. Anyone have any
comments on it? See:
<http://grouper.ieee.org/groups/1363/letters/SchnorrMar98.html>
-----
Vin McLellan + The Privacy Guild + <vin@shore.net>
53 Nichols St., Chelsea, MA 02150 USA <617> 884-5548
-- <@><@> --
The following archive was created by hippie-mail 7.98617-22 on Fri Aug 21 1998 - 17:20:58 ADT