...

I'm not saying they are a "bypass" of the laws. Rather, I'm saying that if the goal is to:

1. Let companies like Netscape make foreign sales.

2. Still comply with the letter of the law.

It takes more than one or two people to coordinate an international effort. Once more than a few people know about it, it becomes "company policy" or "corporate objective", in which case, the NSA/DoS will eventually figure it out and start levying heavy fines and jailing the individuals.

You miss the point! There will be no "international effort"! Here are the steps: 1. Write a program limited to keysize, carefully constructed to isolate those portions of the program which define key size, GAKedness, etc. 2. Get it export approved. Export it. THEN 3. Announce that a "US-only" version of the same program is being released, and include the minimal component which replaces the limited software. Release it, only in the US of course!

The main point is that there is no such thing as the "letter of the law". What they enforce is much broader than that, and how they enforce it is much more subtle than clear-cut criminal prosecution. Therefore, you cannot just use literal loop holes just because it's not clear, because the law they are enforcing is not clear either.

The system I describe doesn't even violate the spirit of the rules. If anything, it bends over backward to implement a foreign version of the software which ALREADY is export-approved at the time it was, um, upgraded. True, it's possible to sneak the extra component out of the country, but hey, it's also possible to sneak an entirely new program out of the country. I'm not suggesting that the company who writes the component takes it out, it'll happen regardless. If the order of the versions was reversed, the USG might complain that the export version was "too similar" to the domestic version. That's why you wait for the export approval before you write the domestic version.