Article View: sci.crypt
Article #2202Re: PKP/RSA comments on PGP legality
From: Carl Ellison
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 20:34
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 20:34
82 lines
4766 bytes
4766 bytes
In article <hmiller.724397340@lucpul.it.luc.edu> hmiller@lucpul.it.luc.edu (Hugh Miller) writes: > Mr. Bidzos gives the appearance of being a very effective lawyer, >representing the interests of his company, RSADSI/PKP, well. > Consider the post via Carl Ellison. By not making it under his own >name, but under Carl's headers, he achieves a double purpose. First, he >veils his threat. A veiled threat, of course, works better than a naked >one, since it leaves a greater measure of uncertainty in the mind of >potential end-users. And, after all, that is one of the principal aims >of the posting: to scare off potential end-users of PGP, currently the >world's most popular public-key encryption program. Second, he presents >the spectacle to the Net of an intimidated potential end-user, to wit, >Carl. This is also psychologically quite effective, as we in the >Internet community have the tendency to identify with Carl, being like >him. There has been a rush of postings on alt.security.pgp lately >urging the dropping of PGP for RIPEM. How very convenient. Success, so >far. [etc.] My posting was instigated by me. It was written by a group at PKP and RSA, including the corporate lawyer(s), I believe. [I tell lawyer jokes like anyone else, but do happen to have a number of lawyer friends (and one relative) so I don't write off lawyers totally. I'll listen and make up my own mind.] I don't see what RSA and PKP wrote as a veiled threat. I believe their intentions are well known. They want to continue making money off their patent. They, like us, would probably like to see the export laws become more rational (although I don't speak for them). They have even more reason to fear those export laws than we do since their very existence depends on not being shut down. I really believe that they need to keep their noses especially clean -- so I accept the argument that possible ITAR violations by PGP are enough for them to keep their hands off. No one at RSA used me in this posting. I had originally asked (months ago) if I could buy an individual RSA use license from them in order to make it legal for me to use PGP. I was turned down. From there, I continued the discussion and heard over several mail messages substantially what was in the posting. As I kept reading sci.crypt, I felt it was time to say something and was about to post from what I had learned in those exchanges but instead I wrote to RSA asking them if they'd like to post something. I would rather let them word it than do it all myself. They didn't want to post directly but were willing to write something which I could post. I agreed so that's what happened. I do not speak for RSA. I am not their employee. I do choose to honor their patent and obey the ITAR (I think/hope). [I use company computers and have been strongly advised to behave this way by my company's lawyers.] If I were to buy a PC for myself (which I've never bothered doing because the ones I get at work are so good, and I have free use of them in my own time :-), I don't know what I would use for security. I have RSAREF. I'd probably roll my own or use RIPEM (once it's finally released). Or, I might even buy a commercial package like MailSafe -- although I believe that PGP will set the worldwide standard for mail interchange just like UNIX set standards -- and for the same reason: it's free and therefore ubiquitous. What I use today is my own secret-key algorithm together with scripts which let me conveniently interface with Sun's Mail (or the VMS MAIL command). [I have versions for Sun, VAX VMS, Stratus VOS and soon to be MIPS. I'll probably port it to HP-UX soon. But this is just historical accident. If I were starting over today, I'd use compress|des|tran|des|tran|des and transmit the keys with RSA, using RSAREF. This would take a special modification to RSAREF, but I believe it wouldn't be hard to get.] --Carl -- -- <<Disclaimer: All opinions expressed are my own, of course.>> -- Carl Ellison cme@sw.stratus.com -- Stratus Computer Inc. M3-2-BKW TEL: (508)460-2783 -- 55 Fairbanks Boulevard ; Marlborough MA 01752-1298 FAX: (508)624-7488
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<1glfhhINNbia@transfer.stratus.com>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!noc.near.net!transfer.stratus.com!ellisun.sw.stratus.com!cmeReferences:
<1galtnINNhn5@transfer.stratus.com> <hmiller.724397340@lucpul.it.luc.edu>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!noc.near.net!transfer.stratus.com!ellisun.sw.stratus.com!cme From: cme@ellisun.sw.stratus.com (Carl Ellison) Newsgroups: sci.crypt,alt.security.pgp Subject: Re: PKP/RSA comments on PGP legality Date: 15 Dec 1992 20:34:57 GMT Organization: Stratus Computer, Software Engineering Lines: 82 Message-ID: <1glfhhINNbia@transfer.stratus.com> References: <1galtnINNhn5@transfer.stratus.com> <hmiller.724397340@lucpul.it.luc.edu> NNTP-Posting-Host: ellisun.sw.stratus.com