From: Ted Garrett <teddygee@visi.net>
Date: Tue, 30 Jan 1996 03:59:52 +0800
To: packrat@tartarus.uwa.edu.au
Subject: Re: more RANTING about NSA-friendly cpunks
Message-ID: <2.2.32.19960129041358.0069fc48@mail.visi.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


At 01:10 PM 1/28/96 +0800, you wrote:
>In message <199601262011.MAA17408@netcom16.netcom.com>, 
>  "Vladimir Z. Nuri" wrote:
>> has anyone *tried* just ignoring the ITAR wrt crypto and seeing what 
>> would happen?
[snip]
>> but aren't we equally as comic in assuming that violating the ITAR
>> crypto sections will inevitably bring the 4 horsemen of the NSA??
>
>One word...
>Zimmerman.
>I do agree with what you're saying though.

  But what he's saying is basically this:  If instead of targeting a single
entity - (eg Zimmerman) for a crypto violation, they had to look at
thousands of separate entities per violation (eg cypherpunks, inner circle,
users on AOL who have a clue, mit professors, cryptographic experts, corner
preachers, etc.), then soon the court system would be forced to come to the
realization that, indeed, the genie IS out of the bottle, and the system as
a whole would have to recognize that a change needs to be made.  As it
stands, they bullied on ONE man for something he didn't do, and could drop
the case without there needing to be a precedent set.

  Because there is now no precedent, the NSA and FBI can still use the ITAR
regulations to batter any indiviual who attempts to distribute strong
cryptography tools to the general public.  If they had been confronted with
tens, hundreds, thousands, or tens of thousands of people tangibly involved
in distributing cryptographic tools, then it would have been much harder for
them to say "We are just going to drop this.".  They would have had to
either go the distance or dismiss it in the beginning.

  If PGP had been developed under the gnu charter or the Linux concept, what
would the government have been able to do about it being distributed?  NOT A
DAMNED THING.

Or at least that's my opinion.