From: Marc Horowitz <marc@GZA.COM>
Date: Fri, 27 Aug 93 11:42:52 PDT
To: technopagan priest <tedwards@wam.umd.edu>
Subject: Re: ViaCrypt PGP and source code
In-Reply-To: <199308271810.AA08679@rac1.wam.umd.edu>
Message-ID: <9308271841.AA01487@dun-dun-noodles.aktis.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


>> I understand that there is a contractual problem with releasing
>> the RSA source.  Perhaps the contract should be re-negotiated.

You don't seem to understand that RSA has a monopoly.  You think they
are going to bend over backwards for ViaCrypt PGP when they are
pulling in millions in royalties from companies like Lotus?

>> I will bet ViaCrypt PGP will rapidly become a best-seller if
>> implemented properly.  There is plenty of money to be made if
>> everything is kept on the cryptographic "up and up."

"Nobody ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the
American public."  Consider how unaware most people are today.
They're not going to care if they can audit the code; most people
don't have the skills anyway.  If AT&T or the government says
something is secure, they will be believed by most people.  Certain
large organizations (like banks) may have the clout (financial clout,
since that's what counts) to do their own code audit.  But Cypherpunks
just aren't big enough fish.  There's plenty of money to be made if
you aren't 'on the cryptographic "up and up"'.

If you don't want to buy ViaCrypt PGP because you can't get sources,
RSA isn't going to cry over those lost profits.  Their monopoly
insures that they can get their money from more compliant customers.

		Cynically yours,
		Marc