1995-12-06 - Re: NIST GAK export meeting, short version

Header Data

From: Michael Froomkin <froomkin@law.miami.edu>
To: Futplex <futplex@pseudonym.com>
Message Hash: 85c9b744e126864de9ce153c4e0586dbea26033f765fdcdafb5e56d0fbc55ce9
Message ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.951206132336.19360H-100000@viper.law.miami.edu>
Reply To: <199512060426.XAA20883@thor.cs.umass.edu>
UTC Datetime: 1995-12-06 18:22:47 UTC
Raw Date: Wed, 6 Dec 95 10:22:47 PST

Raw message

From: Michael Froomkin <froomkin@law.miami.edu>
Date: Wed, 6 Dec 95 10:22:47 PST
To: Futplex <futplex@pseudonym.com>
Subject: Re: NIST GAK export meeting, short version
In-Reply-To: <199512060426.XAA20883@thor.cs.umass.edu>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.951206132336.19360H-100000@viper.law.miami.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain

On Tue, 5 Dec 1995, Futplex wrote:

> This answer sounds rather silly to me. Do they seriously doubt that the
> escrow mechanism works (modulo MAB's observations about the LEAF), or expect 

No.  They doubt that "software binding" works, ie are afraid someone will 
figure out an easy way to hack the software to by-pass the escrow mechanism.

> us to believe that they do ?  Clinton Brooks' comments cited later by Pat
> suggest a certain acceptance that enforcement will have its problems
> (e.g. strong crypto tunnelling), but perhaps Greiveldinger somehow doesn't
> officially share that view. Is there another interpretation of "working"
> I'm missing here ?
> -Futplex <futplex@pseudonym.com>
> "I'm from the D.O.E. and I just need to leave this here temporarily"
> 	(from a political cartoon entitled "The 3 Biggest Whoppers")

A. Michael Froomkin        | +1 (305) 284-4285; +1 (305) 284-6506 (fax)
Associate Professor of Law | 
U. Miami School of Law     | froomkin@law.miami.edu
P.O. Box 248087            | http://www.law.miami.edu/~froomkin
Coral Gables, FL 33124 USA | It's warm here.