From: paul@poboy.b17c.ingr.com (Paul Robichaux)
Date: Mon, 29 Aug 94 06:25:00 PDT
To: wessorh@ar.com (Rick H. Wesson)
Subject: Re: Are RSA licenses fungible?
In-Reply-To: <199408280534.WAA01508@ar.com>
Message-ID: <199408291323.AA28951@poboy.b17c.ingr.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


-----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-----