From: ljo@ausys.se (Johansson Lars)
To: hfinney@shell.portal.com
Message Hash: 8df6a720d1cf277a7b9c5162ddcc2e14c882478415429f138b018a3f0699372e
Message ID: <95Dec15.155851gmt+0100.53765@void.ausys.se>
Reply To: N/A
UTC Datetime: 1995-12-15 16:28:39 UTC
Raw Date: Sat, 16 Dec 1995 00:28:39 +0800
From: ljo@ausys.se (Johansson Lars)
Date: Sat, 16 Dec 1995 00:28:39 +0800
To: hfinney@shell.portal.com
Subject: Re: Blinding against Kocher's timing at
Message-ID: <95Dec15.155851gmt+0100.53765@void.ausys.se>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Hal <hfinney@shell.portal.com> wrote:
>From: ljo@ausys.se (Johansson Lars)
>> Does anyone know whether David Chaum's patent on
>> blind digital signatures extends to this application?
[Parts omitted]
>It's conceivable that Kocher's blinding would be a patentable technique
>in itself, and not impossible that he has already applied for a patent
>before publishing. Probably he would have said so if that were his
>intention, though.
I just found this at RSA:s <http://www.rsa.com/rsaqa.htm> home page:
>Q: Has RSA been "broken"?
>
> A: No. The attack that Paul Kocher describes is academically
interesting, but it is >easy to defend systems against his attack using a
technique called
> "blinding", developed by Dr. Ron Rivest of RSA.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
When did Dr. Rivest develop this "blinding" technique?
Was it pre or post Chaum?
Perhaps Rivest himself have applied for this patent.
More info from RSA:s home page:
> Another way is to use a technique called "blinding", in which a random
number
> is introduced into the decryption process, making it impossible to get any
useful >data out of timing these transactions.
>
>so instead of doing the usual RSA decryption:
>
> m = c^d mod n
>
>we perform:
>
> m = r^-1*(c*r^e)^d mod n
>
>where r is a random number, and is its inverse.
/Lars
Return to December 1995
Return to “ljo@ausys.se (Johansson Lars)”
1995-12-15 (Sat, 16 Dec 1995 00:28:39 +0800) - Re: Blinding against Kocher’s timing at - ljo@ausys.se (Johansson Lars)