Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2000 21:11:32 -0500 From: "Crist J. Clark" <cjc@cc942873-a.ewndsr1.nj.home.com> To: "Dan O'Connor" <dan@mostgraveconcern.com> Cc: "Sergey N. Voronkov" <serg@dor.zaural.ru>, freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: OT: US encryption regulations and FreeBSD crypto programs Message-ID: <20000330211132.A21512@cc942873-a.ewndsr1.nj.home.com> In-Reply-To: <0ed601bf9a57$1fae1d80$0200000a@danco>; from dan@mostgraveconcern.com on Thu, Mar 30, 2000 at 06:48:51AM -0800 References: <0ed601bf9a57$1fae1d80$0200000a@danco>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, Mar 30, 2000 at 06:48:51AM -0800, Dan O'Connor wrote: > >> the U.S. knows how to build encryption software. > > > >You are wrong. > > Yes, it was a Joke... > > I was mearly attempting to point out the stupidity of U.S. export > restrictions, which only serve to ensure that U.S. companies don't > participate in the world-wide encryption marketplace... The train of thought goes that if USAian companies were allowed to export encryption software without restrictions, encryption would very quickly become a standard feature on _everything_ (domestic and abroad). However, since so many contries are completely or partially dependent on US technology (whether it be Windoze or hardware), they cannot go all encrypted in order for things to be compatible with products from the USA. Compatibility also keeps the USA from going all encrypted too, which Janet Reno likes. Basically, since the USA dominates the world-wide software marketplace but they can't play in the encyption market, the encryption market is not as big as it otherwise would be. Not that I agree with the policies, but that's the present rational behind them. -- Crist J. Clark cjclark@home.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-security" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20000330211132.A21512>