[144913] in cryptography@c2.net mail archive
Re: [Barker, Elaine B.] NIST Publication Announcements
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Perry E. Metzger)
Wed Sep 30 20:56:39 2009
From: "Perry E. Metzger" <perry@piermont.com>
To: "James A. Donald" <jamesd@echeque.com>
Cc: cryptography@metzdowd.com
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 2009 20:56:05 -0400
In-Reply-To: <4AC3C1AB.2080807@echeque.com> (James A. Donald's message of
"Thu, 01 Oct 2009 06:38:03 +1000")
"James A. Donald" <jamesd@echeque.com> writes:
>>> The Haber & Stornetta scheme provides a timestamping
>>> service that doesn't require terribly much trust,
>>> since hard to forge widely witnessed events delimit
>>> particular sets of timestamps. The only issue is
>>> getting sufficient granularity.
>
>> I don't know if their scheme was patented in Germany.
>> It was in the U.S., though I think that at least some
>> of the patents expire within the year.
>
> In looking this up, I have noticed a pile of patents
> that patent something equivalent or near equivalent to a
> patricia hash tree, or elaborately disguised patricia
> trees, or something suspiciously similar to a patricia
> hash tree, and various special cases of it, and
> applications of it, without using the name "patricia
> hash tree"
Perhaps that's because this is a Merkle tree, not a patricia
tree. Patricia trees are radix trees -- they're used for optimizing
routing tables, not in cryptography.
Perry
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The Cryptography Mailing List
Unsubscribe by sending "unsubscribe cryptography" to majordomo@metzdowd.com
