From: Jeff Weinstein <jsw@netscape.com>
Date: Sat, 2 Dec 95 16:13:06 PST
To: "James A. Donald" <jamesd@echeque.com>
Subject: Re: Info on Netscape's key escrow position
In-Reply-To: <199512021603.IAA00950@blob.best.net>
Message-ID: <30C0EA69.4806@netscape.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


James A. Donald wrote:
> 
> At 11:01 PM 12/1/95 -0800, Jeff Weinstein wrote:
> >
> >  I think the gist
> > of it is that if governments require key escrow, we will have to do it
> > in order to sell our products with encryption into those countries.
> 
> Jim Clark wrote:
> >> But if we do not come up with a solution to this problem that is
> >> acceptable to each government, we will not be able to export our products,
> >> except with a short key length (e.g. 40 bit keys), and that will not be
> >> acceptable to corporate customers in other countries.
> 
> I read it as saying:  "Let us help the government invade the privacy
> of our customers, so that the government will do us some favors in export
> licensing", rather than "Well if they stick it to us at gunpoint,
> we will submit."

  After talking with Jim over lunch, I believe that the second interpretation
is more accurate, and is certainly true of the companies position at this
point.  Also keep in mind that Jim's comments are his own opinion, and do
not necessarily represent the position of the company.  Barksdale's law is
that we provide value to our customers.  Our customers want long keys an
no GAK, both within and outside the country.  As long as we are legally
allowed to do that, I think we will.  The fact that customers know the
dangers of 40-bit keys, and that it is the government that is forcing
them to use weak keys, is in large part due to the brute force cracks
of the cypherpunks.

	--Jeff

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