1997-05-01 - Crypto hooks and EAR (Re: SAFE Bill is a Disaster–“Use a cipher, go to prison”)

Header Data

From: das@razor.engr.sgi.com (Anil Das)
To: cypherpunks@cyberpass.net
Message Hash: 9aa8e2bc787b83eae754969a25a63c582885cacbb0db46ce442918d461196c62
Message ID: <9705011609.ZM14377@razor.engr.sgi.com>
Reply To: <v03007800af8e9b2e837c@[207.167.93.63]>
UTC Datetime: 1997-05-01 23:22:38 UTC
Raw Date: Fri, 2 May 1997 07:22:38 +0800

Raw message

From: das@razor.engr.sgi.com (Anil Das)
Date: Fri, 2 May 1997 07:22:38 +0800
To: cypherpunks@cyberpass.net
Subject: Crypto hooks and EAR (Re: SAFE Bill is a Disaster--"Use a cipher, go to prison")
In-Reply-To: <v03007800af8e9b2e837c@[207.167.93.63]>
Message-ID: <9705011609.ZM14377@razor.engr.sgi.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


On May 1, 11:40am, Tim May wrote:
>
> I'm no expert in these areas, but doesn't this consitute "providing hooks"
> for strong crypto? The EARs say that a "hook" for inserting crypto modules
> once a product is exported are essentially as bad as providing the crypto
> before the product is exported.

	If the EAR says that, I would like to have a reference to
the section, please, so I can look it up at jya.com. I am not
saying it is not there, just that I haven't seen it, and I would
like to see what the exact language is.

--
Anil Das






Thread