From: attila <attila@primenet.com>
Date: Fri, 5 Jan 1996 16:20:38 +0800
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: \"Concryption\"
In-Reply-To: <199601050105.UAA29900@light.lightlink.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.BSD.3.91.960105074625.2355D-100000@usr4.primenet.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


On Thu, 4 Jan 1996 anonymous@freezone.remailer wrote:

> Does anyone understand what this "Concryption" really is? Reading the
> press blurbs, it could be nothing more than simply compressing the
> stream before encrypting it. A patent on that idea would be rather
> awkward.
> 
	thought that myself when I first read it -- did that at least 15 
    years with the standard unix compress --broke compress into a single
    library module, fed itfrom the input buffer and directly fed it to an
    RSA style paired key unit and streamed it out whereever specified
    --yes, it was far more efficient than two programs --and that was on
    my VAXEN (780)! 

	however, I guess they think they have reinvented the world and no 
    one ever tried to patent the process. patents are not worth the paper
    they are printed on in general --I stopped filing in 1975. I was
    supporting ignorant patent lawyers who could not even write the
    claims! That, and feds took away a nuber of patents in the national
    interest, which of course they deny as they scrubbed the rcords
    clean.... 

	so, let's see if he can enforce it!
__________________________________________________________________________
    go not unto usenet for advice, for the inhabitants thereof will say:
      yes, and no, and maybe, and I don't know, and fuck-off.
_________________________________________________________________ attila__