Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . This office action is in response to the amendment filed on 03/12/2025. Claims 1-20 are currently pending in the filing of 03/12/2025, claims 1-20 have not been amended and no claims have been cancelled or newly added.
Information Disclosure Statements
The information disclosure statement(s) (IDS) submitted on 3/19/2025 have been considered. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement(s) have been considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Specifically, dependent claim 4 recites “the data padding”, which lacks antecedent basis. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1-2, 7-8, 10-13, 15, and 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20080216151 to Miyazaki et al. (hereinafter Miyazaki), in view of US 20150227747 to Gassi (hereinafter Gassi).
Regarding claim 1, Miyazaki teaches,
A method of generating a polymorphic digital signature comprising:
receiving first data; (Abstract & fig. 4 teach using redactable signatures on a document.)
generating a mask based at least in part on second data representative of random data; ([0015] teaches redactable signature, which replaces part of the document data. [0032] teaches replacing the redactable block with random data.) (Gassi, as further discussed below, [0059] teaches applying random data to other data.)
generating an initial digital signature based on the mask and the first data; (Abstract, [0015], & [0032] teach redactable signature. See also fig. 4. )
encrypting the initial digital signature
replacing the discarded subset ([0036] teaches padding to obtain data of predetermined length.) (Applicant’s printed publication at [0004] teaches that the discarded portion is replaced with padding data.)
generating a polymorphic digital signature based on the remainder of the encrypted data. ([0036] teaches hashing data, subjecting to padding, and signing the padded data. [0032] teaches combining multiple hashes to form the signature.) (Gassi, as further discussed below, also teaches encrypted data.)
Miyazaki fails to explicitly teach encrypted data that is supplied to a shifter which discards or compresses the data,
However, Gassi teaches,
encrypting the initial digital signature to generate encrypted data; ([0026] teaches matrices may be encrypted and truncated. Fig. 6 & [0058] teaches encrypted data may be shifted.)
discarding a subset of the encrypted data using a shape shifter map; (Fig. 6 & [0058] teaches encrypted data may be shifted. Fig. 8 & [0072-73] teach compression of data, which discards / truncates bits, and the use of padding in formatting. [0015] teaches shaping matrices. Fig. 7 also teaches reversable compression of the matrices.)
replacing the discarded subset of the encrypted data with first replacement data thereby generating a remainder of the encrypted data; and (Fig. 8 & [0072-73] teach compression of data, which discards / truncates bits, and the use of padding in formatting. Regarding padding, see also [0048-52]. [0087] teaches removing data, shaping the matrix to compress the data.) (Applicant’s printed publication at [0004] teaches that the discarded portion is replaced with padding data.)
generating a polymorphic digital signature based on the remainder of the encrypted data. (Fig. 8, [0072-73], & [0087])
Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teachings of Miyazaki, which teaches redactable signatures (Abstract) which replace personal data, to increase security, that is signed (Abstract & fig. 4), with Gassi, which also teaches digital signatures ([0005]), and additionally teaches a reversable encoding using matrices ([0026]), shifting of data ([0049] & [0058]). One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to perform such an addition to provide Miyazaki with the added ability to use shifting / matrix manipulation of security data to further obfuscate data, as taught by Gassi, for the purpose of increasing security by using reversable computations that can be used by the recipient ([0026]).
Regarding claim 2, Miyazaki and Gassi teach,
The method of claim 1, further comprising
adding data padding to the first data, wherein the initial digital signature is based on the mask and first data including the data padding. (Miyazaki, [0036] teaches hashing data, subjecting to padding, and signing the padded data.) (See also, Gassi, Fig. 8 & [0072-73] teach compression of data, which discards / truncates bits, and the use of padding in formatting. Regarding padding, see also [0048-52].)
Regarding claim 7, Miyazaki and Gassi teach,
The method of claim 1, wherein the step of generating the initial digital signature comprises iteratively processing the first data. (Miyazaki, [0032] teaches calculating multiple hash values of different portions of the document.) (Gassi, [0004-5] teach iteratively processing data.)
Regarding claim 8, Miyazaki and Gassi teach,
The method of claim 1, wherein the first replacement data is padding data. (Miyazaki, [0036] teaches padding to obtain data of predetermined length.)
Regarding claim 10, Miyazaki and Gassi teach,
The method of claim 1, further comprising generating the shape shifter array map, wherein the step of generating the polymorphic digital signature is further based on the shape shifter array map. (Gassi, [0049] teaches the shifting of bits is performed by multiplication and division operations. [0015] teaches shaping matrices.)
Regarding claim 11, Miyazaki and Gassi teach,
A method of generating a polymorphic digital signature comprising:
receiving first data;
generating a mask;
generating an initial digital signature based on the first data and the mask;
encrypting the initial digital signature to generate encrypted data;
discarding a subset of the encrypted data using a shape shifter array map;
replacing the discarded subset of the encrypted data with first replacement data thereby generating a remainder of the encrypted data, wherein the discarded subset of the encrypted data includes subsets of one or more bytes; and (Gassi, [0072] teaches using different amounts of truncation, which examiner interprets as one or more bytes. See also figs. 6-8.)
generating a polymorphic digital signature based on the remainder of the encrypted data.
Claim 11 is rejected using the same basis of arguments used to reject claim 1 above.
Regarding claim 12, Miyazaki and Gassi teach,
The method of claim 11, wherein generating the mask is based on second data representative of random data. (See rejection of claim 1, regarding Miyazaki, [0032] teaches replacing the redactable block with random data.)
Claim 12 is rejected using the same basis of arguments used to reject claim 1 above.
Regarding claim 13, Miyazaki and Gassi teach,
The method of claim 11, further comprising
replacing the discarded subset of the encrypted data thereby generating an updated initial digital signature, (See rejection of claim 1, Gassi discussing last two limitations.)
wherein generating the polymorphic digital signature is based on the updated initial digital signature. (See rejection of claim 1, Gassi discussing last two limitations.)
Claim 13 is rejected using the same basis of arguments used to reject claim 1 above.
Regarding claim 15, Miyazaki and Gassi teach,
The method of claim 11, wherein the first replacement data is data padding. (Gassi, Fig. 8 & [0072-73] teach compression of data, which discards / truncates bits, and the use of padding in formatting. Regarding padding, see also [0048-52]. [0087] teaches removing data, shaping the matrix to compress the data.)
Regarding claim 17, Miyazaki and Gassi teach,
A method of generating a polymorphic digital signature comprising:
generating an initial digital signature based on a mask and a first data;
encrypting the initial digital signature to generate encrypted data;
discarding a subset of the encrypted data using a shape shifter array map thereby generating a remainder of the encrypted data;
replacing the discarded subset of the encrypted data with first replacement data thereby generating an updated initial digital signature, wherein the discarded subset of the encrypted data includes a subset of at least one byte; and (Gassi, [0072] teaches using different amounts of truncation, which examiner interprets as one or more bytes. See also figs. 6-8.)
generating a polymorphic digital signature based on the updated initial digital signature.
Regarding claim 18, Miyazaki and Gassi teach,
The method of claim 17, further comprising generating the shape shifter array map, (See rejection of claim 1 & 17.)
wherein generating the polymorphic digital signature is further based on the shape shifter array map. (See rejection of claim 1 & Gassi, Fig. 8, [0072-73], & [0087])
Regarding claim 19, Miyazaki and Gassi teach,
The method of claim 18, wherein replacing the discarded subset of the encrypted data to generate an updated initial digital signature comprises replacing the discarded subset with a portion of the shape shifter array map.
Claim 19 is rejected using the same basis of arguments used to reject claim 10 above.
Regarding claim 20, Miyazaki and Gassi teach,
The method of claim 17, further comprising compressing the first data, wherein generating the initial digital signature is based on the compressed first data.
Claim 20 is rejected using the same basis of arguments used to reject claim 3 above.
Claims 3-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Miyazaki, in view of Gassi, US 20190215152 to Wang et al. (hereinafter Wang).
Regarding claim 3, Miyazaki and Gassi teach,
The method of claim 1, further comprising
Miyazaki and Gassi fail to explicitly teach compressing first data to generate signature,
However, Wang teaches,
compressing the first data, wherein generating the initial digital signature is based on the compressed first data. (Wang, figs. 3b & 4 & [0050-52] teach compression of data and signing.)
Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teachings of Miyazaki, which teaches redactable signatures (Abstract) which replace personal data, to increase security, that is signed (Abstract & fig. 4), with Gassi, which also teaches digital signatures ([0005]), and additionally teaches a reversable encoding using matrices ([0026]), shifting of data ([0049] & [0058]), with Wang, which also teaches encryption and signatures (Title & [0051]), and additionally teaches the use of data compression and padding of signed data ([0050-52]). One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to perform such an addition to provide Miyazaki and Gassi with the added ability to compress data and add padding, as taught by Wang, for the purpose of maintaining security while increasing network efficiency by compressing data into a standardized format.
Regarding claim 4, Miyazaki, Gassi, and Wang teach,
The method of claim 3, further comprising
. (Miyazaki, in the rejection of claim 1, teaches masking data.)
adding second replacement data to the compressed first data, wherein generating the initial digital signature is based on . (Wang, figs. 3b & 4 & [0050-52] teaches compressing data 412 and padding and signing at 418.)
Regarding claim 5, Miyazaki, Gassi, and Wang teach,
The method of claim 3, wherein the second replacement data is padding data. (Wang, figs. 3b & 4 & [0050-52] teaches compressing data 412 and padding and signing at 418.)
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Miyazaki, in view of Gassi, in view of US 20130283363 to Rautenberg et al. (hereinafter Rautenberg).
Regarding claim 6, Miyazaki and Gassi teach,
The method of claim 1,
wherein the second data representative of random data is generated . (Miyazaki, [0015] teaches redactable signature, which replaces part of the document data. [0032] teaches replacing the redactable block with random data.) (Gassi, [0059] teaches applying random data to other data.)
Miyazaki and Gassi fail to explicitly teach use of subsets of time to generate random / pseudo random numbers,
However, Rautenberg teaches,
wherein the second data representative of random data is generated based on a subset of a time stamp, wherein the subset of the time stamp corresponds to a length of time that is less than a second. ([0043] teaches using fractions of a second as the basis of generating a pseudo-random number. During the first second after midnight, the fraction of a second is less than a second.)
Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teachings of Miyazaki, which teaches redactable signatures (Abstract) which replace personal data, to increase security, that is signed (Abstract & fig. 4), with Gassi, which also teaches digital signatures ([0005]), and additionally teaches a reversable encoding using matrices ([0026]), shifting of data ([0049] & [0058]), with Rautenberg, which also teaches encryption (Abstract) and SSL which uses signatures to verify integrity and authenticate ([0005]), and additionally teaches generating pseudo random numbers using fractions of a second ([0043]). One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to perform such an addition to provide Miyazaki and Gassi with the added ability to generate pseudo random numbers using fractions of a second, as taught by Rautenberg, for the purpose of maintaining security while using the computational efficiency of a microprocessor which keeps track of time to very small fractions of a second in order to generate pseudo random numbers.
Claims 9 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Miyazaki, in view of Gassi, in view of US 20120039469 to Mueller et al. (hereinafter Mueller).
Regarding claim 9, Miyazaki and Gassi teach,
The method of claim 1,
Miyazaki and Gassi fail to explicitly teach the use of Blowfish, PGP, CBC, DES, IDEA or Rijndael,
However, Mueller teaches,
wherein the initial digital signature is encrypted ([0228] teaches an encrypted signature.) (As discussed above in the rejection of claim 1, Miyazaki also teaches encrypting a signature) based on an encryption method selected from the group consisting of Blowfish, PGP, CBC, DES, IDEA, and Rijndael. ([0119] teaches encryption methods including Blowfish, DES, and Rijndael.)
Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teachings of Miyazaki, which teaches redactable signatures (Abstract) which replace personal data, to increase security, that is signed (Abstract & fig. 4), with Gassi, which also teaches digital signatures ([0005]), and additionally teaches a reversable encoding using matrices ([0026]), shifting of data ([0049] & [0058]), with Mueller, which also teaches encryption of authentication data (Abstract) including encrypting a signature ([0228]), and additionally teaches encryption methods including Blowfish, DES, and Rijndael ([0119]). One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to perform such an addition to provide Miyazaki and Gassi with the added ability to use specific encryption algorithms, as taught by Mueller, for the purpose of increasing security by using specific encryption methods that are known to be secure, while maintaining computational efficiency by the use of known encryption methods..
Regarding claim 16, Miyazaki, Gassi, and Mueller teach,
The method of claim 11, wherein the initial digital signature is encrypted based on an encryption method selected from the group consisting of Blowfish, PGP, CBC, DES, IDEA, and Rijndael.
Claim 16 is rejected using the same basis of arguments used to reject claim 9 above.
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Miyazaki, in view of Gassi, in view of US 20140248929 to Noonan et al. (hereinafter Noonan).
Regarding claim 14, Miyazaki and Gassi teach,
The method of claim 11,
wherein the discarded subset of the encrypted data is selected . (Rejection of claim 1, Gassi figs. 6-8 teach this feature.)
Miyazaki and Gassi fail to explicitly teach a displacer / chaotic map,
However, Noonan teaches,
wherein the discarded subset of the encrypted data is selected based on a pre-existing displacer map. ([0004] teaches using chaotic maps for image encryption / image scrambling, and fig. 1 teaches the Sudoko array / map that is used.[0078] teaches the encryption is reversable. [0096] teaches shifting the matrix. [0226] teaches elements being removed and replaced using the matrix.)
Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teachings of Miyazaki, which teaches redactable signatures (Abstract) which replace personal data, to increase security, that is signed (Abstract & fig. 4), with Gassi, which also teaches digital signatures ([0005]), and additionally teaches a reversable encoding using matrices ([0026]), shifting of data ([0049] & [0058]), with Noonan, which also teaches encrypting data (Abstract), and additionally teaches the use of Sudoku arrays / maps to encrypt data ([0002]) where this type of encryption is efficient for images / video ([0004]). One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to perform such an addition to provide Miyazaki and Gassi with the added ability to use chaotic maps / Sudoko arrays, as taught by Noonan, for the purpose of increasing security of images while increasing computational efficiency by using methods of scrambling that are compatible with image data.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRIAN WILLIAM AVERY whose telephone number is (571) 272-3942. The examiner can normally be reached on 9AM-5PM.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Farid Homayounmehr can be reached on (571) 272-3739.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/B.W.A./
/JASON K GEE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2495
Prosecution Insights