Re: Are RSA licenses fungible?
From owner-cypherpunks@toad.com Sat Aug 27 22:08 PDT 1994 Received: from relay2.UU.NET (relay2.UU.NET [192.48.96.7]) by ar.com (8.6.9/8.6.5) with ESMTP id WAA01459 for <wessorh@ar.com>; Sat, 27 Aug 1994 22:08:22 -0700 Received: from toad.com by relay2.UU.NET with SMTP id QQxewa21172; Sun, 28 Aug 1994 01:07:36 -0400 Received: by toad.com id AA01260; Sat, 27 Aug 94 21:59:17 PDT Received: from nic.cerf.net by toad.com id AA01254; Sat, 27 Aug 94 21:59:07 PDT Received: from ininx (ininx.com [134.24.4.70]) by nic.cerf.net (8.6.8/8.6.6) with SMTP id VAA26020; Sat, 27 Aug 1994 21:59:00 -0700 Received: by ininx (4.0/SMI-4.0) id AA05474; Sat, 27 Aug 94 20:42:04 PDT Date: Sat, 27 Aug 94 20:42:04 PDT From: jkreznar@ininx.com (John E. Kreznar) To: perobich@ingr.com Cc: cypherpunks@toad.com Subject: Re: Are RSA licenses fungible? Sender: owner-cypherpunks@toad.com Content-Type: text Content-Length: 2530
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
[snip]
JEK: Is this true even if the person is a registered buyer of 2.7?
Public availability of a program's source code is a powerful means to be sure that it is correct. How can one gain such assurance for PGP 2.7?
How could confidence in the correctness of a secret program, even by its author, ever match that of a program open to public scrutiny by any interested person?
Uhlhorn: ViaCrypt has exactly the same position if a person were to make 2.6ui look like ViaCrypt PGP V2.7 regardless of whether or not they are a registered user of ViaCrypt PGP V2.7. It is plain dishonest and illegal!
[End of Uhlhorn dialogue]
Granted, the issue here is different from yours, but it does give an idea of how ViaCrypt might react to an attempt to use their license to legitimize your use of another PGP. Hope this helps.
John E. Kreznar | Relations among people to be by jkreznar@ininx.com | mutual consent, or not at all.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.3a
iQCVAgUBLmAGZ8Dhz44ugybJAQGSKAQAjlOFHarkVhF7Cjcy3xX3v7A4XyAH5B7H C61efV7poiJXcYCV8H6t2w6RGrk1ux/ynwoseVOjTdDraK5crqxxITCplLqY13Vv rzaY0BFOWOLBIgty9Gjh4Oz4v89lRKxn2MhsflrS/TxMBZSeaYec7K4ufDZwCvWN JQ94CgrJM/g= =1O6L -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
why don't you just buy an RSA toolkit licence and patch it inro whatever you want, just don't redestribute code... -Rick
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- "Rick H. Wesson" <wessorh@ar.com> writes
why don't you just buy an RSA toolkit licence and patch it inro whatever you want, just don't redestribute code...
The obstacle there has been that this is for a person who refuses on principle to affirm that he is a national person of any nation. I think that such a person could not obtain an RSA toolkit license. Right? The interest in the ViaCrypt option arose on the hope that their national requirements (merely being ``in the US'') might be satisfied, even if those for MIT's PGP 2.6 (affirmation that one is a US citizen or national) could not be. John E. Kreznar | Relations among people to be by jkreznar@ininx.com | mutual consent, or not at all. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.3a iQCVAgUBLmDpF8Dhz44ugybJAQEtJQP/VsvgQ2AjvwLB6IDETveF49Ll2MPjtqQq 33/eWlWcqLxYKwDE3GAM/2ug4yAQtLlRg6IciNnzj7nS/4dZgeHxEB+bmMt3kTra JvTKLiJcEWAS1Y50mE5Dqnv6eTLlEy9TUcViTPkOWtWhZHcKi/GyuwPxvW4ZU17d 3aAHXaFi39M= =MU/N -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Not long after my original post, I got a message from Dave Barnhart of ViaCrypt. He asserted that it would be "illegal" for me to buy a ViaCrypt license, then use PGP 2.6-based code in my own application, and that it would violate both my RSAREF license and my MIT license on any copies of PGP 2.6 that I was licensed to operate. So, the short answer is I'm going to roll my own instead of using PGP or a PGP-based tool. D-H for the initial key exchange, plus 3DES for the actual encryption, and poof! away I go. And yes, I know D-H is claimed by RSA's PK patents. - -Paul - -- Paul Robichaux, KD4JZG | Demand that your elected reps support the perobich@ingr.com | Constitution, the whole Constitution, and Not speaking for Intergraph. | nothing but the Constitution. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6 iQCVAgUBLmHhL6fb4pLe9tolAQFgAAQAn1hP9L1Tu8XwnQNwJ0ZqwpxPqJhSTZ4r iKjre6KBFQ/2V5lmd6booHoN9Acper2dTV1Pzlj4dhqK8ox9Fo6kgIjfsNZQdCRA JrWzgAyY6TvCEjkS2B5Uig90Ar2f/cKcwiyhm4nJ/0yTnJbjas25Ymu+DRH3zW4E 03EG+HSgKpg= =kVSt -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
participants (3)
-
jkreznar＠ininx.com -
paul＠poboy.b17c.ingr.com -
Rick H. Wesson