Re: Paper is out, electrons are in

[Kent Crispin <kent@songbird.com>]

Jeff Williams allegedly said:
> 
> Kent,
> 
>   Please read elow your comments.
> 
> Kent Crispin wrote:
> > 
> > Jeff Williams allegedly said:
> > >
> > > Rick,
> > >
> > >   Yes it does.  But the draft needs to be a bit more clear here.
> > > It need to specify what keylength or type of digital signatures
> > > should or can be used. I realize this is nit picking here, but if
> > > not specified IACH will get a visit fron NSA, instructing them
> > > just what the munitions law is.  PGP, does not conform within
> > > that law for international communications digital signature's.
> > 
> > Unfortunately, Mr Williams is quite confused about these issues.
> 
>   Honestly Kent, I don't believe that you are correct in this 
> assumption.  Please review www.comsensus.com or www.rsa.com
> for further details.  If you have some problems finding
> this information, let me know I have several other 
> pointers and a copy of the actule law on this matter. 

Perhaps you should read your own pointers, first.

>From http://www.rsa.com/rsalabs/newfaq/q149.html:

"The NSA has stated that it has no objection to the use of secure
cryptography by U.S.  industry.  It also has no objection to
cryptographic tools used for authentication, as opposed to privacy."

and

"NSA generally does not approve export of products used for encryption
unless the key size is strictly limited.  It does, however, approve
for export any products used for authentication only, no matter how
large the key size, so long as the product cannot be converted to be
used for encryption."

But that's a moot point, since international versions of PGP already
exist.

-- 
Kent Crispin				"No reason to get excited",
kent@songbird.com,kc@llnl.gov		the thief he kindly spoke...
PGP fingerprint:   5A 16 DA 04 31 33 40 1E  87 DA 29 02 97 A3 46 2F