[2728] in cryptography@c2.net mail archive
Re: FYI: I believe Microsoft has knowingly violated the export
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Tom Perrine)
Wed May 20 13:58:46 1998
Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 10:10:28 -0700
From: Tom Perrine <tep@SDSC.EDU>
To: reinhold@world.std.com
CC: rsalz@shore.net, cryptography@c2.net
In-reply-to: <v03130303b1886b370d06@[24.128.118.45]> (reinhold@world.std.com)
I think that part of the issue is that Kerberos was deemed to be
non-exportable if the calls to the crypto libraries were left in, but
the called crypto libraries were left out.
Why should Microsoft get better treatment for its inferior product,
while a superior, lower-cost product which happens to be lawyer-bereft
received export "permission"?
Is this a true double standard, or have the standards changed over the
last few years?
--
Tom E. Perrine (tep@SDSC.EDU) | San Diego Supercomputer Center
http://www.sdsc.edu/~tep/ | Voice: +1.619.534.5000
Been there, done that, erased the evidence, blackmailed the witnesses...
