From: Bill Stewart <bill.stewart@pobox.com>
To: Adam Back <jya@pipeline.com
Message Hash: 42ab6d85b5f3d35a40582278d05e4d01370c4d2a89863f282de58dbea6985c11
Message ID: <3.0.5.32.19980118144309.00868e80@popd.ix.netcom.com>
Reply To: <1.5.4.32.19980117020259.00733f54@pop.pipeline.com>
UTC Datetime: 1998-01-18 23:00:58 UTC
Raw Date: Mon, 19 Jan 1998 07:00:58 +0800
From: Bill Stewart <bill.stewart@pobox.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Jan 1998 07:00:58 +0800
To: Adam Back <jya@pipeline.com
Subject: Re: New Software Controls
In-Reply-To: <1.5.4.32.19980117020259.00733f54@pop.pipeline.com>
Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.19980118144309.00868e80@popd.ix.netcom.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
(Wasenaar discussion...)
>> You might want to highlight the following section ... not sure of the
>> entire context ... but this isn't something that I'd seen before. It looks
>> like control of any software that can transmit data.
>>
>> c.3. ``Software'' which provides the capability of recovering
>> ``source code'' of telecommunications ``software'' controlled by
>> 5A001, 5B001, or 5C001;
>Export ban on decompilers? Disassemblers? Debuggers?
>These tools are general purpose, so this seems particularly weird.
It's only weird if you assume the authors have a clue...
Depending on the overall context, telco software companies and their
customers may find this section interesting as well.
If they were thinking at all when they wrote this, they were probable concerned
about products that let people ship exportable binaries and patchtools
that let users recover the source code to undo the limitations.
But as you say, general purpose tools work fine. The special purpose
tools I've seen have been the ones that patch the binaries of Netscape
40-bit versions to reenable 128-bit capability, and they just use binary.
Thanks!
Bill
Bill Stewart, bill.stewart@pobox.com
PGP Fingerprint D454 E202 CBC8 40BF 3C85 B884 0ABE 4639
Return to January 1998
Return to “John Young <jya@pipeline.com>”