From: Nelson Minar <nelson@media.mit.edu>
To: shamrock@netcom.com
Message Hash: a552666e424d6a2b81ea8d12106733f38ad3978d8a29659eb5ecb437480b5f00
Message ID: <cpag204huqp.fsf@hattrick.media.mit.edu>
Reply To: <3.0.32.19970113210258.006ade10@192.100.81.126>
UTC Datetime: 1997-01-14 20:23:16 UTC
Raw Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 12:23:16 -0800 (PST)
From: Nelson Minar <nelson@media.mit.edu>
Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 12:23:16 -0800 (PST)
To: shamrock@netcom.com
Subject: Re: New US regs ban downloadable data-security software
In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.19970113210258.006ade10@192.100.81.126>
Message-ID: <cpag204huqp.fsf@hattrick.media.mit.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
shamrock@netcom.com (Lucky Green) writes:
> Commercial data security software of any kind, regardless if it uses crypto
> or not, is however prohibited from being distributed via the Internet or
> being exported by any other means.
I can at least vaguely understand the rationale behind restricting the
export of cryptography. But I don't even begin to comprehend
restricting the export of data security software. What is going on
here? Whose idea is this, what is the agenda?
Is the US government really prepared to take on all the producers of
virus protection software? Symantec and IBM are pretty big players to
upset. And they don't even have the "drug dealers and terrorists"
bugbear to defend this particular export restriction.
In my more cynical mood I'm afraid that what's going on is the US
government is trying to protect its capability to wage information
warfare. Could they get away with this?
Return to January 1997
Return to “Toto <toto@sk.sympatico.ca>”