IP Library Granted Patent US 10,872,487
Granted Patent B2
US 10,872,487 · App. 16/829,811 · Granted Dec 22, 2020

System and method for cryptographic choice mechanisms

Inventors: Andrew Komo (Washington, DC); Lawrence M Ausubel (Washington, DC)
Assignee: EFFICIENT AUCTIONS LLC
G07C13/005G06F16/24578H04L9/12H04L2209/08
View Patent ↗
Loading inventors, assignments & file history…
Monitor This Case
Get email alerts when status or documents change.
Order Certified Copies
Most orders are placed with the USPTO same day — all within 24 business hours.
Order via The Patent Place →
Pre-filled with this patent's details
Quick Facts
Patent No.
US 10,872,487
App. No.
16/829,811
Granted
Dec 22, 2020
Kind
B2
Abstract

The present invention provides an improved system and method for using cryptography to secure computer-implemented choice mechanisms. In several preferred embodiments, a process is provided for securing participants' submissions while simultaneously providing the capability of validating their submissions. This is referred to as a random permutation. In several other preferred embodiments, a process is provided for securing participants' advance instructions while simultaneously providing the capability of validating their advance instructions. This is referred to as a secure advance instruction. Applications include voting mechanisms, school choice mechanisms, and auction mechanisms.

Claims (34)

1. A computer system for securing submissions in a choice mechanism while simultaneously validating the submissions, said system comprising at least one computer, said choice mechanism using submissions that express choices taken from a plurality of possible choices, comprising:

receiving means of a first computer of said computer system for receiving a submission, wherein said submission expresses choices and wherein the choices expressed within the submission are encrypted; and

validating means of said first computer for validating the submission in relation to one or more constraints on the encrypted choices expressed within said submission, wherein said validating occurs while said choices are encrypted.

2. The system of claim 1 wherein the choices expressed within the submission are encrypted by a process of random permutation.

3. The system of claim 1 wherein the choices expressed within the submission are encrypted by a process of secure advance instructions.

4. The system of claim 1 which further comprises encrypting means of a second computer of said computer system for encrypting the choices expressed within a submission by a process of random permutation, said second computer located remotely from said first computer and interconnected by a computer network.

5. The system of claim 1 which further comprises encrypting means of a second computer of said computer system for encrypting the choices expressed within a submission by a process of secure advance instructions, said second computer located remotely from said first computer and interconnected by a computer network.

6. The system of claim 1 wherein the validating is in relation to whether the choices expressed within the submission are a ranked ordering of a set.

7. The system of claim 2 wherein the validating is in relation to whether the choices expressed within the submission are a ranked ordering of a set.

8. The system of claim 4 wherein the validating is in relation to whether the choices expressed within the submission are a ranked ordering of a set.

9. The system of claim 1 wherein said choice mechanism is a dynamic choice mechanism.

10. The system of claim 9 wherein the validating is in relation to whether the choices expressed within the submission satisfy an activity rule.

11. The system of claim 2 wherein said choice mechanism is a dynamic choice mechanism.

12. The system of claim 11 wherein the validating is in relation to whether the choices expressed within the submission satisfy an activity rule.

13. The system of claim 1 wherein said choice mechanism is a voting mechanism.

14. The system of claim 2 wherein said choice mechanism is a voting mechanism.

15. The system of claim 4 wherein said choice mechanism is a voting mechanism.

16. A method for securing submissions in a choice mechanism while simultaneously validating the submissions, said method implemented on a computer system comprising at least one computer, said choice mechanism using submissions that express choices taken from a plurality of possible choices, said method comprising:

receiving a submission on a first computer of said computer system, wherein said submission expresses choices and wherein the choices expressed within the submission are encrypted; and

validating said submission on said first computer in relation to one or more constraints on the encrypted choices expressed within said submission, wherein said validating occurs while said choices are encrypted.

17. The method of claim 16 wherein the choices expressed within the submission are encrypted by a process of random permutation.

18. The method of claim 16 wherein the choices expressed within the submission are encrypted by a process of secure advance instructions.

19. The method of claim 16 which further includes encrypting the choices expressed within a submission on a second computer by a process of random permutation, said second computer located remotely from said first computer and interconnected by a computer network.

20. The method of claim 16 which further includes encrypting the choices expressed within a submission on a second computer by a process of secure advance instructions, said second computer located remotely from said first computer and interconnected by a computer network.

21. The method of claim 16 wherein the validating is in relation to whether the choices expressed within the submission are a ranked ordering of a set.

22. The method of claim 17 wherein the validating is in relation to whether the choices expressed within the submission are a ranked ordering of a set.

23. The method of claim 19 wherein the validating is in relation to whether the choices expressed within the submission are a ranked ordering of a set.

24. The method of claim 16 wherein said choice mechanism is a dynamic choice mechanism.

25. The method of claim 24 wherein the validating is in relation to whether the choices expressed within the submission satisfy an activity rule.

26. The method of claim 17 wherein said choice mechanism is a dynamic choice mechanism.

27. The method of claim 26 wherein the validating is in relation to whether the choices expressed within the submission satisfy an activity rule.

28. The method of claim 16 wherein said choice mechanism is a voting mechanism.

29. The method of claim 17 wherein said choice mechanism is a voting mechanism.

30. The method of claim 19 wherein said choice mechanism is a voting mechanism.

Assignments (1)
ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNOR'S INTEREST Recorded Mar 25, 2020
From: KOMO, ANDREW; AUSUBEL, LAWRENCE M
To: EFFICIENT AUCTIONS LLC
Reel/Frame 052226/0951 →
Continuity (4)
Continuation PCTUS2018052695 · Sep 25, 2018
Provisional Application 62721328 · Aug 22, 2018
Provisional Application 62596379 · Dec 8, 2017
Related Publication 20200226867A1 · Jul 16, 2020
Cited By (3)
US 12,322,217 US 12,530,591 US 12,657,982