1998-01-27 - RE: Announcement: RPK InvisiMail released on 12 Jan, 1998

Header Data

From: Bill Stewart <bill.stewart@pobox.com>
To: “cypherpunks@cyberpass.net>
Message Hash: 342e693b7713390af536e5a82609e7ca8b86619ecfc8d66068d69caf7f6256c9
Message ID: <3.0.5.32.19980127005058.0087ea90@popd.ix.netcom.com>
Reply To: <01BD2A7C.342CBB60@joswald@rpkusa.com>
UTC Datetime: 1998-01-27 07:58:00 UTC
Raw Date: Tue, 27 Jan 1998 15:58:00 +0800

Raw message

From: Bill Stewart <bill.stewart@pobox.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Jan 1998 15:58:00 +0800
To: "cypherpunks@cyberpass.net>
Subject: RE: Announcement: RPK InvisiMail released on 12 Jan, 1998
In-Reply-To: <01BD2A7C.342CBB60@joswald@rpkusa.com>
Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.19980127005058.0087ea90@popd.ix.netcom.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



Thanks for an interesting perspective on working with NZ's export 
bureaucrats.

At 04:59 PM 1/26/98 -0800, Jack Oswald  <joswald@rpkusa.com> wrote:
>Bill - The technology that we export as part of RPK InvisiMail, is 
>world-class strong crypto.  Key size options are 607 bits and 1279.  The 
>math behind the system is based on the same as that of D-H.  There is no 
>snake oil.  There was no intentional or unintentional attempt to mislead 
>any government authority.  We also did not request an export license, 
>because there is no need to do so in New Zealand as long as the export is 
>by means of the Internet.  Peter G. knows this as well.  The story may be 
>different for physical export on disk, disc or tape, although we cannot 
>concur with Peter's personal experience.  Our experience is that we get 
>pretty good treatment from the NZ authorities.  We also may use a different 
>approach.  I have often heard that you can often get a better response when 
>using honey than vinegar.  Therein may explain differences in our 

				Thanks! 
					Bill
Bill Stewart, bill.stewart@pobox.com
PGP Fingerprint D454 E202 CBC8 40BF  3C85 B884 0ABE 4639






Thread