[18420] in cryptography@c2.net mail archive
Re: ECC patents?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Alexander Klimov)
Mon Sep 12 08:47:22 2005
X-Original-To: cryptography@metzdowd.com
X-Original-To: cryptography@metzdowd.com
Date: Mon, 12 Sep 2005 11:58:14 +0300 (IDT)
From: Alexander Klimov <alserkli@inbox.ru>
To: Ben Laurie <ben@algroup.co.uk>
Cc: cryptography@metzdowd.com
In-Reply-To: <43249434.2020105@algroup.co.uk>
On Sun, 11 Sep 2005, Ben Laurie wrote:
> Alexander Klimov wrote:
> > ECC is known since 1985 but seems to be absent in popular free
> > software packages, e.g., neither gnupg nor openssl has it (even if the
> > relevant patches were created). It looks like the main reason is some
> > patent uncertainty in this area.
>
> I don't, but it is not the case that OpenSSL does not include ECC.
You are absolutely right the Sun patch was finally accepted,
although there were some patent-related discussions, e.g., at
http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2002/10/msg00100.html
There is also work on ECC for gnupg
http://www.g10code.de/tasklist.html#gcrypt-ecc
and again there were patent-related discussions about the issue. ECC
is also implemented in crypto++ and other libraries.
But (potential) problem still persists: even if openssl implements ECC
it does not save you from patent issues if they exist.
--
Regards,
ASK
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The Cryptography Mailing List
Unsubscribe by sending "unsubscribe cryptography" to majordomo@metzdowd.com
