Artifact Signing Patents: Who Leads, Where the Gaps Are 2026
- Concentrated but not locked up. the ranked leader holds 411 records yet the top 5 combined account for only 22.3% of all 5,192 records in scope — plenty of room outside the leaders.
- Filing has cooled from its 2019 peak. 302 records that year, with the 2021-to-2024 complete-year span down 33% (235 to 158), though 2025-2026 figures are still filling in due to publication lag.
- H04L dominates the claim space. 78.5% of records touch digital information transmission (H04L), while adjacent classes like G09C (ciphering) and G11B (information storage) sit under 5% each.
Filing growth compares 2021 (235 records) with 2024 (158) — a three-year span. 2024 is the most recent year we treat as complete: publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, so 2025 onwards are still filling in and any growth rate that ends there would understate the field. Top-5 share is the combined record count of the five largest assignees divided by all 5,192 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.
What this landscape covers
This dataset tracks patent families combining code signing, transparency-log and signature-verification claims with mechanisms for key rotation, certificate revocation, inclusion proofs, offline verification, hash chains or trust anchors — the operational plumbing that turns a signature scheme into something that survives key compromise and network partition. It spans 5,192 published records filed between 2015 and mid-2026.
The technology sits at the intersection of cryptographic infrastructure and distributed systems: firmware attestation, software bill-of-materials verification, and the transparency-log patterns popularised by certificate and container ecosystems all fall inside this search.
Let an AI agent run this analysis on your own technology
Pick a task. Every answer cites the patents behind it.
Filing trends and technology composition
Two views of the same 5,192 records: how filing activity has moved year over year, and which IPC subclasses carry the claim density.
Filing trend, 2017-2026
Filings rose to a peak of 302 in 2019, then eased; the last complete three-year span (2021-2024) shows a 33% decline, from 235 to 158. 2025 and 2026 numbers will revise upward as later publications catch up with filing dates.
IPC subclass distribution
H04L (digital information transmission) appears in 78.5% of records and G06F (electric digital data processing) in 45.2%, confirming this is primarily a networked-transmission and general-computing problem rather than a dedicated cryptographic-hardware one — G09C (ciphering) sits at just 4.3%.
Shares are the percentage of the 5,192 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Artifact Signing and Verification with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about artifact signing and verification and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaRepresentative and most-cited records
Hardware-Anchored DAO Governance Engine with Quantum-Resistant Attestation
Filed in mid-2026, this application ties firmware supply-chain attestation to a public transparency log at node initialization, then layers a silicon root-of-trust key binding, threshold-BLS quorum across heterogeneous trusted execution environments, and an atomic governance transition engine on top. It illustrates how artifact-verification primitives are now being bundled into decentralized-governance and blockchain infrastructure claims rather than staying confined to traditional software update pipelines.Filing date and assignee are shown in the table; abstract text is excerpted from the published application.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US6850252B1 | Intelligent electronic appliance system and method | 4,058 |
| 2 | US5677955A | Electronic funds transfer instruments | 2,041 |
| 3 | US20070087756A1 | Multifactorial optimization system and method | 1,866 |
| 4 | US20020010679A1 | Information record infrastructure, system and method | 1,634 |
| 5 | US8316237B1 | System and method for secure three-party communications | 1,620 |
| 6 | US20070053513A1 | Intelligent electronic appliance system and method | 1,452 |
| 7 | US20170041296A1 | Systems and methods of secure data exchange | 1,321 |
| 8 | US7181017B1 | System and method for secure three-party communications | 1,316 |
| 9 | US7813822B1 | Intelligent electronic appliance system and method | 1,198 |
| 10 | US20190349426A1 | The internet of things | 1,104 |
Citation counts inside a searched corpus favour older filings — treat these as markers of influence on later art, not of current commercial relevance.
Each row carries its publication number; clicking a row searches Eureka by that number.
Put your own technology through the same analysis
Eureka on the web
When you want the answer in the next five minutes.
The agent works the prompt against patents and technical literature, citing every source.
Run your analysis now →MCP server & REST API
When it has to run inside your own pipeline.
Patent search, landscape analysis and assignee resolution as MCP tools. Drop them into any agent framework, or call REST directly.
Browse MCP servers →What the data implies for filing strategy
Three patterns worth acting on before drafting claims in this space.
The leader is large, the field is not locked
The ranked leader alone holds 411 records, but the top 5 assignees combined take only 22.3% of all 5,192 records in scope. That leaves close to 80% of filing activity distributed across a long tail of single- and few-filing entrants — a structure that favours a well-drafted narrow claim over trying to out-file the leader.
Complete-year filings are down, not flat
Filings fell from 235 in 2021 to 158 in 2024, a 33% drop across the only span in this dataset that can be treated as fully published. That is a real pullback in new filing activity among the established players, even before accounting for the publication lag that still understates 2025-2026.
Transmission claims dominate over dedicated crypto hardware
H04L appears in 78.5% of records and G06F in 45.2%, while G09C (ciphering and secret communication) — the class most associated with dedicated cryptographic primitives — sits at just 4.3%. Claims are being built around how signatures move through networked systems, not around new cipher constructions.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to artifact signing and verification, with the prior art for and against each one.
| Assignee | Co-assignee | Shared families |
|---|---|---|
| Security First Corp | OHARE MARK S | 31 |
| Security First Corp | ORSINI RICK L | 30 |
| BlackBerry Ltd | LITTLE HERBERT A | 15 |
| Security First Corp | LANDAU GABRIEL D | 11 |
| Security First Corp | STAKER MATTHEW | 10 |
| Security First Corp | MARK OHARE | 10 |
| BlackBerry Ltd | BROWN MICHAEL S | 8 |
| Security First Corp | RICK ORSINI | 7 |
Co-assignee pairing is thin: only 10 pairs appear in this dataset, and the strongest pairs link individual named inventors to their corporate assignee rather than showing cross-company collaboration — a sign this field is still built on internal R&D rather than joint filings.
Who is filing and where the openings sit
The ranked leaders show clear concentration at the very top, but momentum has slowed across nearly all of them in the most recent complete year.
Scale without recent momentum
The leading assignee's 411 records dwarf the fifth-place total of 164, but recent-year momentum data shows several of the largest historical filers, including this one, recorded no new filings in the latest tracked year — scale built earlier, not being actively extended now.
A workable entry tier exists
Tenth place sits at 89 records, well below the leader but still a substantial position — evidence that a focused filer can build a credible portfolio here without matching the scale of the top handful.
Almost no one is accelerating
Of the named assignees with recent-year momentum data, only one shows growth, and it is a move from 1 to 2 filings — a low-base swing, not a strategic push. Most others, including several large historical filers, show zero filings in the latest year.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Intel Corp | 2 | +100% |
| BlackBerry Ltd | 0 | — |
| Security First Corp | 0 | — |
| Panasonic Holdings Corp | 0 | — |
| Amazon Tech Inc | 0 | — |
| Intertrust Technologies Corp | 0 | -100% |
| International Business Machines Corporation | 0 | — |
| Sony Group Corp | 0 | — |
Where to take this analysis
The dataset points to specific next steps depending on whether the goal is freedom-to-operate, portfolio strategy, or spotting an open filing window.
Check freedom-to-operate against the top 5
With the top 5 assignees holding 22.3% of all 5,192 records, a targeted claim-chart review against just those five portfolios covers a meaningful share of the risk before broadening the search.
Run a freedom-to-operate checkProbe the under-claimed branches
G09C, G07F, H04N and G11B overlaps each sit under 5% of records — worth a closer look before assuming the space is closed, especially where they intersect with offline or hardware-anchored verification.
Explore white space in EurekaWatch for the 2025-2026 publication catch-up
Recent-year filing counts will revise upward as publication lag closes; re-running the trend analysis in a future cut will clarify whether the 2021-2024 pullback continued or reversed.
Track filing trends over timeCommon questions about this landscape
This landscape identifies 5,192 published patent records filed between 2015 and mid-2026 that combine code signing, transparency-log or signature-verification claims with revocation, rotation, inclusion-proof or trust-anchor mechanisms. The count reflects the specific search string used, so a broader or narrower definition of the field would produce a different total. Because publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, the 2025 and 2026 figures are still incomplete and will rise in later data cuts.
The assignee ranking covers the 100 companies the data endpoint returns, with the leading assignee holding 411 records and the fifth-place company at 164. Combined, the top 5 account for 22.3% of all 5,192 records in scope, which means the majority of filing activity sits outside the handful of largest holders. This is not an exhaustive list of every company active in the space, only the ranked leaders by family count.
Filing peaked at 302 records in 2019 and has since eased; the most recent complete-year comparison, 2021 to 2024, shows a 33% decline from 235 to 158 filings. Figures for 2025 and 2026 are not yet reliable indicators of a continued slowdown because publication lag means many recent filings have not yet appeared in the record. A clearer read on the current trajectory will only be possible once those later years finish publishing.
H04L, digital information transmission, appears in 78.5% of the 5,192 records, and G06F, electric digital data processing, appears in 45.2%, making this predominantly a networked-transmission and general-computing field. Business-process class G06Q and wireless class H04W follow at 16.3% and 14.4% respectively. Dedicated cryptographic-hardware class G09C is comparatively thin at 4.3%, suggesting most innovation is happening in how signatures and verification move through systems rather than in new cipher primitives.
Classes with low representation relative to the core H04L and G06F claims — including G09C (ciphering), G07F (vending and kiosk apparatus), H04N (pictorial communication) and G11B (information storage) — each sit under 5% of the 5,192 records, pointing to under-claimed intersections such as offline inclusion-proof verification or hardware-bound trust-anchor rotation. Co-assignee collaboration is also thin, with only 10 pairs identified in the dataset, suggesting joint filings between companies are rare and most innovation is happening inside single organisations. Both signals point toward openings for a well-targeted, narrowly drafted filing rather than a broad claim competing directly with the largest holders.
Research Artifact Signing and Verification in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole artifact signing and verification corpus yourself, in your own scope.
Every answer comes back with patent numbers you can open.
Disclaimer. This page is generated from Patsnap Eureka data drawn from a limited snapshot of global patent and scientific-literature records, and is provided for general information and reference only.
Patent data carries inherent limitations: recent filings (typically the most recent 18–24 months) are under-counted due to standard publication lag; counts may be reported at either a patent-family or a patent-record basis and are not always directly comparable; classification, applicant-name, and citation data may contain errors, duplicates, or omissions; and the underlying search query defines and constrains the scope shown. As a result, the analysis may be incomplete or inaccurate and may not reflect the full technology landscape.
Nothing on this page constitutes an exhaustive prior-art, novelty, freedom-to-operate, or validity search, nor does it constitute legal, financial, investment, or professional advice, and it should not be relied upon as such. Any patent, commercial, or strategic decision should be verified independently and reviewed with qualified patent, legal, and domain professionals. Patsnap makes no warranties, express or implied, as to the accuracy, completeness, or fitness for any particular purpose of the information presented.
Machine translation. Assignee and organisation names originally recorded in Chinese, Japanese or Korean have been rendered into English by an AI translation step so that the tables stay readable. These renderings are best-effort and may not match a company’s registered English name; the original name is what the underlying patent record carries, and it is what any Eureka query launched from this page uses.