At 10:49 PM 1/24/96, Lucky Green wrote:

At 19:34 1/24/96, Derek Atkins wrote:

...

If I have a function that does something like this:

authenticate (args) { ...

des_encrypt (); ... }

I would have to remove the des_encrypt() call from the authenticate() routine before it can be exported...

What if you replaced it by rot_13 () ? Surely, they can't ban that. And someone later could just swap all rot_13 () for des_encrypt ()

-- Lucky Green <mailto:shamrock@netcom.com> PGP encrypted mail preferred.

Better idea: replace des_encrypt() with fuck_the_itar(). Seriously, this just illustrates the idiocy of banning "hooks" in software. How does one define a "hook"? Just providing source code could be defined as providing a hook, since a good programmer could then modify it to do crypto. Also, how about the various kits and tools used to integrate pgp with pine, eudora, etc -- are these not "hooks"? Clay --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Clay Olbon II | olbon@dynetics.com Systems Engineer | ph: (810) 589-9930 fax 9934 Dynetics, Inc., Ste 302 | http://www.msen.com/~olbon/olbon.html 550 Stephenson Hwy | PGP262 public key: finger olbon@mgr.dynetics.com Troy, MI 48083-1109 | pgp print: B97397AD50233C77523FD058BD1BB7C0 "To escape the evil curse, you must quote a bible verse; thou shalt not ... Doooh" - Homer (Simpson, not the other one) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------