🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1993Jan07.075317.15435@convex.com> hamrick@convex.com (Ed Hamrick) writes:
>The attached information clearly states that publicly available software
>is freely exportable.  There aren't ANY weasel words about types of software.

Unfortunately, the information attached applies specifically to the
Commerce Department's "Core List" controls, *not* to the State
Department's ITARs (International Traffic in Arms Regulations). In
theory, the Core List controls "dual use" technologies (stuff with
both military and civilian uses, general purpose computer hardware
being the classic example) while the ITARs are supposed to regulate
only munitions (i.e., pure weapons, a Stinger missile being the
classic example.)

Unfortunately, the government can't seem to decide which category
(dual use/munition) crypto belongs in. ("It's a floor wax! No, it's a
dessert topping!") So in classic bureaucratic fashion, *both* sets of
export controls mention it. And to make things even more fun, there's
something called a "Commodity Jurisdiction Request" you can file in
this institutionalized turf war between State and Commerce to have
them battle out which set of rules applies to *your* proposed crypto
export.

In practice, whenever crypto is involved, NSA makes the determination.
If they can't crack it, they tell State to rule that it's ITAR
controlled, and thus not eligible for any of the Commerce Dept's
general licenses. If you don't like the determination, about the only
way you can get NSA to change it is to show them, step by step, how to
crack your cipher. This can include describing the Berlekamp-Massey
algorithm to them.

Your tax dollars at work.

Phil