Vladimir Z. Nuri wrote: | CYPHERPUNKS-- this would be another big front page NYT article and | *severe* blow to the spook establishment if someone PUBLISHED this | algorithm in cyberspace.... just noting the obvious and not | encouraging anything ILLEGAL here, heh heh, <wink> I disagree. I think publishing Skipjack would be counterproductive. Right now, we're shooting to make the ITARs irrelevant by saying things like 'IDEA is Swiss, and when we can't export it from the US. What does that do to competitiveness?' We can't make that claim about Skipjack. Skipjack is an NSA designed cipher which the agency probably expects will be publicised. But would they ever admit to it? Heck no. When its published, expect screams of bloody murder by the four horsemen. Many people will believe it. Its easy to construct the case that the ITARs, as they apply to things in the public domain, thing implemented outside the US, things designed outside the US, are just silly. Its much harder to make that argument about Skipjack, especially as you can't legally export the chips. Adam PS: The current (year end double issue) of the Economist is quite an enjoyable read. Crypto relevance? The decipherment of Mayan hieroglyphics, some on commerce on the net. But mostly I just found it a very enjoyable read. -- "It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once." -Hume