🚀 go-pugleaf

>>>>> Regarding Re: RSA Data Security Not All Bad; strnlght@netcom.com (David Sternlight) adds:

> In article <SOWA.92Dec17133825@netcom.com> sowa@netcom.com (Erik Sowa) writes:
>Then the export restriction isn't protecting much, either.

David> referring to piracy of products overseas.

David> I don't know if I understand him correctly, but it seems to me
David> that's arguing that if there are lots of thieves one shouldn't
David> bother with locks.

Geez, David, I thought I was in your kill file. Anyway, what I meant was
in the context of munitions control. Those folks overseas already have
strong crypto software. Whether or not it was obtained legally and/or
"ethically" is not important in that context. The export restrictions
are only harming U.S. companies who would like to sell such software
legally to legitimate customers, U.S. businesses who would like to
protect proprietary information relevant to international transactions,
and ordinary U.S. citizens who would like to protect their privacy for
various reasons. They are certainly *not* keeping crypto capabilities
out of the hands of the "bad guys," whoever they may be. The export
restrictions accomplish nothing of value and make U.S. businesses less
competitive. So, yes, in the context of munitions control I do think it
is a waste of time, money, and effort to continue to bother with locks
that don't keep out the bad guys but make life harder for the good guys.

-- 
Erik Sowa (sowa@netcom.com)