From: Jeff Weinstein <jsw@netscape.com>
Date: Sat, 2 Dec 95 16:29:09 PST
To: Black Unicorn <unicorn@polaris.mindport.net>
Subject: Re: GAK Flap Happening at a Good Time--Journalists Read!
In-Reply-To: <Pine.SUN.3.91.951202140203.1199A-100000@polaris.mindport.net>
Message-ID: <30C0EE0D.48A9@netscape.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


Black Unicorn wrote:
> 
> On Sat, 2 Dec 1995, Jeff Weinstein wrote:
> 
> > Black Unicorn wrote:
> > >
> > > On Fri, 1 Dec 1995, Jeff Weinstein wrote:
> 
> > > >   See my recent message to this list.  We will be taking an anti-GAK
> > > > position.
> > >
> > > So you will refuse to implement GAK in future version of netscape then?
> > > Or you will merely do lipservice to the GAK policies at the conference?
> > >
> > > I think the distinction is quite key.
> >
> >   If the law requires GAK, then I believe that we will implement it rather
> > than just disable encryption.  We are taking a position against GAK and
> > will continue to lobby against it.  We are planning to continue to do both
> > US and Export versions, so I don't think that the government's ploy of
> > trying to lure companies into weakening their domestic versions will work.
> 
> AT&T seems to have been suitably 'incentivized'
> The receipt of government funding (in whatever guise) might be just as
> powerful in this case.
> 
> To the outsider, it looks as if Netscape 'owes' the government.

  We do owe the government.  They have paid us for Servers and Clients
that support Fortezza.  That is what we owe them.  The money that the
NSA gave us for Fortezza is not very significant compared to what we
are getting from commercial sources.

> > We released a 128-bit version of our product almost a year ago, at a
> > time when many companies were providing only weak crypto in their domestic
> > products so that they didn't have to trouble themselves with two versions.
> 
> And this is impressive.  Stamina, however, is much more difficult.
> 
> > We are actively lobbying in washington to get clarification of the
> > current regulations so that we can provide the US version via an "export
> > controlled" FTP or HTTP download.
> 
> With which firm?  Or have you made it an in-house effort?

  We have recently hired a government liason person to manage our policy
discussions with the government.  He is one of the people that will be
talking to congressional and white house representatives next week.
I don't know if we have made use of any outside lobbying firms.

	--Jeff

-- 
Jeff Weinstein - Electronic Munitions Specialist
Netscape Communication Corporation
jsw@netscape.com - http://home.netscape.com/people/jsw
Any opinions expressed above are mine.