____________________________________________________________________ Before a larger group can see the virtue of an idea, a smaller group must first understand it. "Stranger Suns" George Zebrowski The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage@ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- -------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2001 20:47:59 -0800 From: Wei Dai <weidai@eskimo.com> To: sao19677@terra.com.br Cc: coderpunks@toad.com Subject: Re: Re: SHA-256 source code On Mon, Feb 19, 2001 at 09:12:20AM -0300, sao19677@terra.com.br wrote:

Sorry for the question, but how could we be sure you are the *same* anonymous that posted the code? And for that matter, how could any court possibly judge authorship in this case? What prevents anybody else from using the same amonymous remailer to claim her ownership too?

If the original anonymous author had the foresight to timestamp his code together with a public key before he posted the code, he can now claim authorship by publishing the timestamp and signing messages with that key. BTW, if anyone wants a public domain implementation of SHA-2 (including -256, -384, and -512) with known authorship, there's one available in Crypto++. It's written by myself, based on Steve Reid's public domain SHA-1 code.