[4181] in cryptography@c2.net mail archive
RSA v. C2
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (John Young)
Wed Feb 10 14:12:20 1999
Date: Wed, 10 Feb 1999 08:34:38 -0500
To: cryptography@c2.net
From: John Young <jya@pipeline.com>
Dan Tebbutt wrote an excellent piece yesterday in The
Australian on RSA's fight with C2 for the IP of Eric Young
and Tim Hudson, the covert process of getting AU approval
for export of crypto and what it may mean for sweetheart
arrangements to bypass global controls (no, there's
no hint of GAK, yet):
http://technology.news.com.au/indextech.asp?URL=/techno/features/f90210a.htm
Mirrored at:
http://jya.com/rsa-c2.dt.htm
What's also of interest is how it demonstrates what
appears to be happening with out-of-sight deal making
among crypto manufacturers and government, as indicated
by Freeh's remarks posted here by Declan.
Sue Parker at Americans for Computer Privacy says that it
too is busily working behind the scene to devise crypto legislation
"acceptable to all parties." She wouldn't say when drafts of
deals would be publically available. She did say that the
recent Reno and Freeh encryption remarks "are nothing
new."
These offstage deals may account for why the crypto topic has
been relatively quiet, and not merely because of the impeachment
circus, maybe, indeed, the circus has served as a useful diversion.
The rising hurrahs for counterterrorism funding, both in the US
and overseas, portends a push for maintaining crypto controls
worldwide -- as Reinsch stated in his speech yesterday: with
a 64-bit worldwide limit " a loophole in Wassenaar has been
closed."
And BXA opened its regulation-rich, backroom deal-richer,
Wassenaar site on Monday:
http://www.bxa.doc.gov/Wassenaar/
Compare that smoke-filled Davos-forum with Dan's article on
ever far-reaching, ever-richer RSA. Dream turbo-capitalism.
