The other day someone mentioned that PGP uses a patented algorithm. If this is the case, then what is the difference between using it and the also patented RSA. From the little reading that I have done, it sounds like RSA is a better protocol from the point of view of authentication etc. etc. So, the question is, apart from the fact that PGP exists, and an RSA implementation is not yet available, (to the best of my limited knowledge) is there any reason why we shouldn't use it? Jim McGrath I'd rather have a bottle in front of me than a frontal lobotomy.
From: Jim McGrath <MCGRATH@elec.canterbury.ac.nz>
The other day someone mentioned that PGP uses a patented algorithm. If this is the case, then what is the difference between using it and the also patented RSA. From the little reading that I have done, it sounds like RSA is a better protocol from the point of view of authentication etc. etc.
PGP does use RSA. Obviously the "little reading" that you have done has been little indeed.
So, the question is, apart from the fact that PGP exists, and an RSA implementation is not yet available, (to the best of my limited knowledge) is there any reason why we shouldn't use it?
There are dozens of RSA implementations available including PGP -- PGP is, however, the only widely available one with its code in the public domain. Perry
participants (2)
-
Jim McGrath -
pmetzgerï¼ shearson.com