Re: ntru-crypto - Open Source NTRU Public Key Cryptography Algorithm and Reference Code

3 Dec 2013

      's_*encryption*_*asymmetric encryption*_g'

..given that we've got plenty of options for quantum-resistant
*symmetric* crypto, and several painful-but-sound options for
quantum-resistant signature schemes; Merkle-Lamport, for example.

On Tue, 3 Dec 2013 00:10:29 +0000
Cathal Garvey  wrote:
...
...
Haven't we made the mistake of relying on someone else's IP for
crypto before? I'm looking at you, RSA and IDEA. I have no interest
in a cryptosystem that's owned by someone and that requires me to
release my own software under a particular license to use it. I
don't care how technologically superior it might be.
The GPL doesn't require you to release a cryptosystem under the GPL,
only code for that cryptosystem that derives from GPL'd code. The GPL
in effect is a tragedy-of-the-commons-killomatic: It's an agreement
between me and you saying "I give you my code, if you give it to
others". There's nothing in there about "I offer you my code, and hit
you if you try to write your own instead".
Given that, I have very little time for GPL-haters, because they're
just being whiny bastards. Write your own if you don't like it.
Patents, on the other hand, are a whole different steaming pile of
shit, and NTRU is patented. So, I'm still with you on this one. If
they're somewhere where you can relinquish patents, they should do
that. If not, they should either grant the patents wholly to a public
trust, or put them under the DPL or similar and make an irrevocable
pledge never to use them except defensively, if even that.
Of course, who's to know if you implement or build on NTRU under a
'nym? It remains one of the only cryptosystems that's A) Practical and
B) Quantum-resistant.
Anyone know of any other quantum-resistant algos for *encryption* that
can actually be used today, other than NTRU?
On Sat, 30 Nov 2013 10:47:02 -0800
Sean Lynch  wrote:
...
On Wed, Nov 27 2013, coderman wrote:
...
https://github.com/NTRUOpenSourceProject/ntru-crypto
...
"""
Security Innovation, Inc., the owner of the NTRU public key
cryptography system, made the intellectual property and a sample
implementation available under the Gnu Public License (GPL) in
2013 with the goal of enabling more widespread adoption of this
superior cryptographic technology. The system is also available
for commercial use under the terms of the Security Innovation
Commercial License.
Haven't we made the mistake of relying on someone else's IP for
crypto before? I'm looking at you, RSA and IDEA. I have no interest
in a cryptosystem that's owned by someone and that requires me to
release my own software under a particular license to use it. I
don't care how technologically superior it might be.