🚀 go-pugleaf

> Without this patent, which certainly comes under the kind the FSF
>wishes to abolish, we would have widespread secure Email. You'd be
>able to authenticate your identity to anyone you wished. Many privacy
>issues would become moot, because it would no longer be easy to spy
>on one's personal business.

Well to implement RSA and make it even moderately secure ( It's been
 two years since I've followed factoring technology and was working in
the public key area) you need special purpose hardware.  Modulo
exponentiation in the hundreds or thousands of bits is pretty tough
you know.  A Cylink chip will do it for you but it is pretty expensive
( $500 ).  You just can't do it in software so I don't think it would
become that widespread anyways because of hardware issues. So who
would pay for the licences?  Hardware venders.  Well assume you only
use RSA to encrypt the KEY of a conventional algorithm, which is
probably the way to go,  this still is not in the relm of software
implementations (I don't want to use all that cpu time).  

From a philosophical point of view you may be right, but I've met
these guys at Crypto in Santa Barbara a couple years ago( Rivest and
Shamir) and I really don't have a problem with them.  So I wouldn't
compare them with "The Right Choice" guys.  RSA is a good algorithm
for key distribution but expensive to implement and provide good
security but IMO a bit too much for everyday email.


------------------------------------------------------------
Tim Wade           |  Internet Address: twade@ll.mit.edu
MIT Lincoln Labs   |   (they pay my bills but I'm just a 
Group 48           |   sub-contractor)
------------------------------------------------------------