Exports and criminalizing crypto

[Adam Back]

John Smith <jsmith58 at hotmail.com> writes:
> Getting rid of these export restrictions would produce an explosion
> of Cypherpunk style crypto software.  It is a big win.

I disagree.

Cypherpunk (freeware) crypto isn't hardly hindered at all by EAR
export nonsense.  

You reference Ian Goldberg claiming to have to work on crypto during
trips to Canada.  I think he was just trying to make a political
point.  I submit that he could write and publish all the crypto he
wants in the US (on one of those "export controlled" sites).  It will
get illegally exported in no time at all.  Where's the problem?

William Geiger has PGP on a non-export controlled site, and the export
bods haven't said a word, so it's not even clear that they care about
freeware at this point.

The problem with export controls is for commercial software.
Companies get denied export permission.  Overseas companies probably
wouldn't feel comfortable using non-paid for commercial warez.

Illegally exported commercial crypto warez isn't generally hosted on
ftp/web sites outside the US.  I suspect this has much more to do with
the fact that it is copyrighted, than to do with export regulations.

Netscape, and MSIE browsers are available on web sites, but these are
distributed freely anyway.


Also your claim that the FBI is defeated, and that safe is a good
idea.  Disagree also.

1) SAFE has lots more hurdles to pass before it gets to be law.

2) If it does get to be law, you won't like the modifications that are
made to it by that stage.

3) Crypto-in-a-crime US domestic restrictions are a _bad thing_.

Adam
-- 
Now officially an EAR violation...
Have *you* violated EAR today? --> http://www.dcs.ex.ac.uk/~aba/rsa/

print pack"C*",split/\D+/,`echo "16iII*o\U@{$/=$z;[(pop,pop,unpack"H*",<>
)]}\EsMsKsN0[lN*1lK[d2%Sa2/d0<X+d*lMLa^*lN%0]dsXx++lMlN/dsM0<J]dsJxp"|dc`