How much is my encryption algorithm worth?

[Daniel Mullarkey]

I developed a lossless, key-based, encryption algorithm that can work in any modern programming language and it has a 1-to-1 relationship between the unencrypted values and the encrypted values as long as the key remains the same and the minimum values and maximum values are known. The key can also be of virtually limitless size. How much is this encryption algorithm potentially worth if I patent it?

 

[Arne Vajhøj]

I developed a lossless, key-based, encryption algorithm that can work
in any modern programming language and it has a 1-to-1 relationship
between the unencrypted values and the encrypted values as long as
the key remains the same and the minimum values and maximum values
are known. The key can also be of virtually limitless size. How much
is this encryption algorithm potentially worth if I patent it?

Based on just this description: nothing.

Algorithms matching this description has been known for a few
hundred years.

Maybe it has some true uniqueness. But we don't know.

Besides I am skeptical about getting any encryption algorithm
that is patented with intention to make money to become a standard
today.

Arne

 

[Stefan Ram]

How much is this encryption algorithm potentially worth if I patent it?

We know that you did not take care to research the
appropriate newsgroup for a post that has no specific Java
content. Thus, we can assume that you possibly also might
not have taken care to read the standard literature about
cryptography before writing your algorithm. This gives an
upper bound for the potential worth of your algorithm.

 

[Daniel Mullarkey]

Well, I enjoy computer programming, but I also enjoy making tons of money too! :8)

 

[Daniel Mullarkey]

We know that you did not take care to research the

appropriate newsgroup for a post that has no specific Java

content. Thus, we can assume that you possibly also might

not have taken care to read the standard literature about

cryptography before writing your algorithm. This gives an

upper bound for the potential worth of your algorithm.

Well, there are no other computer programming newsgroups, except for Unix, which would be even less relevant.

 

[Daniel Mullarkey]

Based on just this description: nothing.



Algorithms matching this description has been known for a few

hundred years.



Maybe it has some true uniqueness. But we don't know.



Besides I am skeptical about getting any encryption algorithm

that is patented with intention to make money to become a standard

today.



Arne

Well, the algorithm uses carefully calculated mathematics to give the appearance of gibberish until it is decoded with the proper key or combination of keys. Other than that, I cannot reveal anything, lest I lose any intellectual property right opportunities that I have to the algorithm.

 

[Qu0ll]

"Daniel Mullarkey" wrote in message

Well, there are no other computer programming newsgroups, except for Unix,
which would be even less relevant.

This is some kind of a joke right?

--
And loving it,

-Qu0ll (Rare, not extinct)
_________________________________________________
(e-mail address removed)
[Replace the "SixFour" with numbers to email me]

 

[Simon Lewis]

Well, the algorithm uses carefully calculated mathematics to give the appearance
of gibberish until it is decoded with the proper key or combination of

Nice trolling! Can't believe you managed some serious responses!

 

[Simon Lewis]

"Daniel Mullarkey" wrote in message


This is some kind of a joke right?

And you're adding to it as did the previous poster!

--
And loving it,

-Qu0ll (Rare, not extinct)
_________________________________________________
(e-mail address removed)
[Replace the "SixFour" with numbers to email me]

 

[Qu0ll]

"Simon Lewis" wrote in message

And you're adding to it as did the previous poster!

Your trolling conclusion is most probably accurate but I was prepared to
give him the benefit of the doubt. There are totally clueless posters too
and maybe this is just one of them.

--
And loving it,

-Qu0ll (Rare, not extinct)
_________________________________________________
(e-mail address removed)
[Replace the "SixFour" with numbers to email me]

 

[Arne Vajhøj]

Well, the algorithm uses carefully calculated mathematics to give
theappearance of gibberish until it is decoded with the proper key or
combination of keys.

That is practically the definition of encryption.

Other than that, I cannot reveal anything, lest I
lose any intellectual property right opportunities that I have to the
algorithm.

Then best estimate of value is still zero.

Arne

 

[Joshua Cranmer ðŸ§]

I developed a lossless, key-based, encryption algorithm that can work
in any modern programming language and it has a 1-to-1 relationship
between the unencrypted values and the encrypted values as long as
the key remains the same and the minimum values and maximum values
are known. The key can also be of virtually limitless size. How much
is this encryption algorithm potentially worth if I patent it?

I'd estimate about $0.

Cryptography is difficult and surprisingly involved. No one should be
willing to trust their data to an algorithm that has not undergone
intense cryptanalysis. At the very least, there needs to be signs that
the inventor is very much aware of cryptography and what can go wrong.
The selection process for the SHA-3, for example, rejected 26 of 51
round-1 applicants due to substantial cryptographic weaknesses, and many
of these were presumably proposed by active cryptographic researchers
(since it had to be approved well enough by NIST to make it into round 1).

Your coyness about describing any elements of the algorithm and the
inability to find a more appropriate venue (such as, I don't know,
sci.crypt) are highly suggestive that you have no practical experience
in understanding why cryptographic algorithms would be weak.

 

[Jeff Higgins]

I developed a lossless, key-based, encryption algorithm that can work in any modern programming language and it has a 1-to-1 relationship between the unencrypted values and the encrypted values as long as the key remains the same and the minimum values and maximum values are known. The key can also be of virtually limitless size. How much is this encryption algorithm potentially worth if I patent it?

Good for you.
Obtain a patent.
Market a product.
What's in your wallet?

<http://www.uspto.gov/web/patents/howtopat.htm>
<http://abc.go.com/shows/shark-tank/apply>

 

[Jeff Higgins]

I developed a lossless, key-based, encryption algorithm that can work in any modern programming language and it has a 1-to-1 relationship between the unencrypted values and the encrypted values as long as the key remains the same and the minimum values and maximum values are known. The key can also be of virtually limitless size. How much is this encryption algorithm potentially worth if I patent it?

immeasurable

 

[Jeff Higgins]

immeasurable

incalculable, inestimable, innumerable, untold, countless

 

[Jeff Higgins]

Nice trolling! Can't believe you managed some serious responses!

<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.atheism.moderated/Jb_7Xt08w0w/fRlnOf2Y1uEJ>

 

[Simon Lewis]

I'd estimate about $0.

Cryptography is difficult and surprisingly involved. No one should be willing to
trust their data to an algorithm that has not undergone intense
cryptanalysis. At the very least, there needs to be signs that the inventor is
very much aware of cryptography and what can go wrong. The selection process for
the SHA-3, for example, rejected 26 of 51 round-1 applicants due to substantial
cryptographic weaknesses, and many of these were presumably proposed by active
cryptographic researchers (since it had to be approved well enough by NIST to
make it into round 1).

Your coyness about describing any elements of the algorithm and the inability to
find a more appropriate venue (such as, I don't know, sci.crypt) are highly
suggestive that you have no practical experience in understanding why
cryptographic algorithms would be weak.

But highly suggestive that he's a seasoned troll who knows just how to
get a bunch of opinionated blow hards puffing

 

[Qu0ll]

"Simon Lewis" wrote in message

But highly suggestive that he's a seasoned troll who knows just how to
get a bunch of opinionated blow hards puffing

Probably. But has any harm been done? Some interesting points discussed...

--
And loving it,

-Qu0ll (Rare, not extinct)
_________________________________________________
(e-mail address removed)
[Replace the "SixFour" with numbers to email me]

 

[Arne Vajhøj]

But highly suggestive that he's a seasoned troll who knows just how to
get a bunch of opinionated blow hards puffing

I am not convinced that he is a troll.

He got some replies.

But no heated discussions - just information presented.

Not what the typical troll desires.

Arne

 

[Kevin McMurtrie]

I developed a lossless, key-based, encryption algorithm that can work in any
modern programming language and it has a 1-to-1 relationship between the
unencrypted values and the encrypted values as long as the key remains the
same and the minimum values and maximum values are known. The key can also be
of virtually limitless size. How much is this encryption algorithm
potentially worth if I patent it?

Extremely large key encryption was invented centuries ago so it's worth
nothing. I recommend selling the large key exchange protocol as the
basis for a direct-to-TV spy movie. Misplaced CDs, briefcases
handcuffed to agents, decoy agents, decoy villains, guns, fast cars, etc.