From: Lucky Green <shamrock@netcom.com>
Date: Mon, 3 Jun 1996 15:09:54 +0800
To: John Young <jya@pipeline.com>
Subject: Re: NRC Session Hiss
In-Reply-To: <199606030150.BAA27932@pipe2.t1.usa.pipeline.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.3.89.9606022140.A1546-0100000@netcom13>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain





On Mon, 3 Jun 1996, John Young wrote:

>    However, when pressed by later questioners on this topic, 
>    they expanded their view: that if another, stronger, 
>    program became "ubiquitous" -- in wide use -- they would 
>    support it as the standard of export. When it was pointed 
>    out that PGP now fit this definition, the panel merely 
>    repeated the statement about ubiquity without specifically 
>    affirming or denying the PGP claim. Their poker faces 
>    seemed uniformly in place to dampen a potential 
>    inflammatory topic. 

That PGP is ubiquitous is subject to discussion. PGP is widely available, 
but that doesn't mean that it is widely used. What percentage of email is 
PGP encrypted? Less than half a percent?

PGP was a failure in the mass market, regardless how popular it may be
with some subscribers of this list. The email encryption method that *will*
be ubiquitous and that will cause PGP to be used only by a relatively
small fringe is S/MIME. Within a few months, S/MIME will be on the
desktops of some 20 million people. It, not PGP is the future standard.

Of course S/MIME will default to 40 bit RC-4 and carry the signatures 
outside the encryption envelope. There is little doubt in my mind that 
the pannel will find it much easier to support than PGP.