1997-01-05 - Re: FIPS for AES

Header Data

From: ghio@netcom.com (Matthew Ghio)
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Message Hash: 9b38f38d708abcb8b6d2341bf1c743a730a3d37d92a3b5235c4198be12b9f7b4
Message ID: <199701050618.BAA00319@myriad.alias.net>
Reply To: <9612311143.AA08693@cow.net>
UTC Datetime: 1997-01-05 06:20:33 UTC
Raw Date: Sat, 4 Jan 1997 22:20:33 -0800 (PST)

Raw message

From: ghio@netcom.com (Matthew Ghio)
Date: Sat, 4 Jan 1997 22:20:33 -0800 (PST)
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: FIPS for AES
In-Reply-To: <9612311143.AA08693@cow.net>
Message-ID: <199701050618.BAA00319@myriad.alias.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain

Anonymous wrote:
>         One issue which I haven't seen anybody address is the
> provision to make export licenses easier to obtain for those
> companies which show a credible business plan that supports GAK.
>         1) Isn't this showing favouritism in an administrative
> decision to people who support the government's political agenda.
>         2) If the export of a certain encryption `item' is inimical to
> `National Security', isn't the harm to the `National Security' the same
> regardless of whether the exporter plans to produce GAK products in the
> future or not?
>         Based on these two points shouldn't this aspect of the regulations
> considered as being `arbitrary' and hence unconstitutional.

Yes, yes, and no... Arbitrary government decisions are not unconstitutional
in general; however, arbitrary discretion in prohibiting publications is
most certainly a voilation of the First Amendment.

>         A further thought. If you obtain an export license by showing
> the government a business plan that supports GAK, but then do not
> follow your business plan, how will the goverment `get' you?

They get you through their paradigm of standardless discretion.