From: Adam Shostack <adam@homeport.org>
Date: Sun, 17 Nov 1996 08:29:35 -0800 (PST)
To: jer+@andrew.cmu.edu (Jeremiah A Blatz)
Subject: Re: "Strong" crypto and export rule changes.
In-Reply-To: <0mXaQD200YUf13OMA0@andrew.cmu.edu>
Message-ID: <199611171626.LAA02780@homeport.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


Jeremiah A Blatz wrote:
| Adam Shostack <adam@homeport.org> writes:
| >         What the US government will allow to be exported is not "strong
| > encryption."  It is encryption only slightly too strong to be broken
| > by an amateur effort.  For the right investment in custom hardware, it
| > falls quickly.  (500,000 $US = 3.5 hour avg break).
| <snip>
| >         In other words, the surveilance state is still winning, and
| > American business is still losing.
| 
| Umm, I'm not expert, but it seems to me that the proposal removes the
| "munitions" classification. It seems the USG has removed its defense
| in court chanllenges to export restrictions. Am I totally off-base
| here?

	No, but they were going to lose in court anyway.  They're
losing in the marketplace, and they throw us a bone.  We don't want
bones, we want a full lifting of the restrictions.

	We want to stop wasting time on these silly fights, and start
selling things on the net.

Adam

-- 
"It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once."
					               -Hume