From: Arun Mehta <amehta@giasdl01.vsnl.net.in>
Date: Thu, 18 Jul 1996 09:21:24 +0800
To: David Sternlight <cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: CDT Policy Post 2.27 - No New News on Crypto: Gore Restates
Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19960716230339.002d0458@giasdl01.vsnl.net.in>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


At 10:13 15/07/96 -0700, David Sternlight wrote:
>actions in the Netherlands, the UK, and in the European
>Parliament suggest that an independent European escrow initiative might
>happen within a year. When it does it will be a trivial matter to harmonize
>it with some US offering. The mills in various countries are grinding too
>coincidentally for my taste.

I don't doubt that the Europeans are quite likely to toe the American line -- 
they not seldom do in international negotiations, plus they share the NATO 
mentality. However, that does not constitute international agreement. GAK 
basically requires companies and individuals to trust their government,
and here in India people across the political and economic spectrum would
laugh in your face at the suggestion. Also secrecy from the government is 
crucial to most businesspersons, and I cannot imagine anyone in a country 
with a repressive, inept or corrupt government agreeing to this (And further, 
trusting the far away US government, which might misuse its powers to help
its own industry in international bids).

You might say that repressive governments are not likely to ask their citizens
before agreeing internationally to GAK, but then, citizens are
not likely to ask 
their government either before using good crypto. The matter will land up before
the courts, and that will keep the situation confused for a while. With digital 
commerce seriously hindered by lack of security, I doubt the business community
will stay patient, and want to opt for a hassle-free, tried and
tested, secure and
transparent system such as pgp. Governments cannot for long ignore the wishes
of big business.

>
>Given the glacial pace with which standard integrated crypto has appeared
>on the Internet, with Navigator only going to offer the final
>link--encrypted e-mail--later this year, the above timing isn't necessarily
>one which will be left behind by independent Internet developments. And
>given the glacial pace of PGP movement toward integrated internet standard
>products, it hasn't a hope of beating the above timing to the punch.

While I share your view on the need for urgency in integrating
PGP into Internet 
standard products (and wish the programmers on these projects God-speed!) I
don't think end of this year is too late for them to come out. 

Arun Mehta Phone +91-11-6841172, 6849103 amehta@cpsr.org
http://www.cerfnet.com/~amehta/