Prev: why does PKCS#1 use the LCM instead of Euler's totient function?
Next: Asymmetric key length recommendations
From: Greg Rose on 19 Apr 2010 14:35
In article <8474a8e0-afab-4e27-b144-4d6285c9232f(a)j17g2000yqa.googlegroups.com>,
Tom St Denis <tom(a)iahu.ca> wrote:
>On Apr 19, 4:18�am, Mok-Kong Shen <mok-kong.s...(a)t-online.de> wrote:
>> MK1024 wrote:
>> > What would happen if I posted come code samples here or on a non
>> > Australian code sharing website?
>>
>> It seems that even in US the export regulations aren't exercised with
>> the same energy by the authorities now as several decades ago. (That's
>> maybe there are other problems there that have higher priorities, e.g.
>> wars.) If you want to be absolutely safe, post in an internet cafe with
>> a pseudonym.
>>
>> M. K. Shen
>
>Usually that's because that's the law. But why let facts get in the
>way.
>
>The USA [like Canada] has very clear exceptions for open source
>software. That's why they don't "go after" most people who distribute
>crypto software openly. I suspect Australia is similar in this
>context though I can't say for sure (our resident Aussie can, Greg
>what's the word?).
>
>If you're doing anything proprietary or otherwise closed source you
>best get an export license.

For about 12 years, we have had export licenses
from the DSD to post software on our web site.
Recently we got a letter from them, telling us not
to bother them any more. Then we moved the stuff
to a US website anyway. For that we just send
email to the two email addresses that you can find
on the BXA web site.

Australia has never gone after people with
software encryption, to the best of my knowledge.
Also, it's worth noting that the regulations are
written to *track* exports, not to prevent them.
They pretty much can't refuse an export license
without ministerial approval, then questions like
"You're interfering with Australia's
competitiveness in the global market" get asked
in question time.

Greg.
--
From: Pubkeybreaker on 19 Apr 2010 14:44
On Apr 19, 7:06 am, Tom St Denis <t...(a)iahu.ca> wrote:

>
> The USA [like Canada] has very clear exceptions for open source
> software.  That's why they don't "go after" most people who distribute
> crypto software openly.


And we mostly have Dan Bernstein to thank for this! Kudos to Dan.
From: Scott Contini on 19 Apr 2010 21:29
On Apr 20, 4:35 am, g...(a)nope.ucsd.edu (Greg Rose) wrote:
> In article <8474a8e0-afab-4e27-b144-4d6285c92...(a)j17g2000yqa.googlegroups..com>,
> Tom St Denis  <t...(a)iahu.ca> wrote:
>
>
>
> >On Apr 19, 4:18 am, Mok-Kong Shen <mok-kong.s...(a)t-online.de> wrote:
> >> MK1024 wrote:
> >> > What would happen if I posted come code samples here or on a non
> >> > Australian code sharing website?
>
> >> It seems that even in US the export regulations aren't exercised with
> >> the same energy by the authorities now as several decades ago. (That's
> >> maybe there are other problems there that have higher priorities, e.g.
> >> wars.) If you want to be absolutely safe, post in an internet cafe with
> >> a pseudonym.
>
> >> M. K. Shen
>
> >Usually that's because that's the law.  But why let facts get in the
> >way.
>
> >The USA [like Canada] has very clear exceptions for open source
> >software.  That's why they don't "go after" most people who distribute
> >crypto software openly.  I suspect Australia is similar in this
> >context though I can't say for sure (our resident Aussie can, Greg
> >what's the word?).
>
> >If you're doing anything proprietary or otherwise closed source you
> >best get an export license.
>
> For about 12 years, we have had export licenses
> from the DSD to post software on our web site.
> Recently we got a letter from them, telling us not
> to bother them any more. Then we moved the stuff
> to a US website anyway.  For that we just send
> email to the two email addresses that you can find
> on the BXA web site.
>
> Australia has never gone after people with
> software encryption, to the best of my knowledge.

I just became curious about the old ssleay from Eric
Young and Tim Hudson. Found this interesting commentary
from Vin McLellan:
http://www.mail-archive.com/openssl-users(a)openssl.org/msg00873.html

Scott


> Also, it's worth noting that the regulations are
> written to *track* exports, not to prevent them.
> They pretty much can't refuse an export license
> without ministerial approval, then questions like
> "You're interfering with Australia's
> competitiveness in the global market" get asked
> in question time.
>
> Greg.
> --

From: Mok-Kong Shen on 23 Apr 2010 04:39
Scott Contini wrote:
[snip]
> http://www.mail-archive.com/openssl-users(a)openssl.org/msg00873.html

I personally find it of interest/value to be reminded by this text of
distant past of Wassenaar and EFF.

M. K. Shen


From: Tom St Denis on 23 Apr 2010 06:37
On Apr 19, 2:44 pm, Pubkeybreaker <pubkeybrea...(a)aol.com> wrote:
> On Apr 19, 7:06 am, Tom St Denis <t...(a)iahu.ca> wrote:
>
>
>
> > The USA [like Canada] has very clear exceptions for open source
> > software.  That's why they don't "go after" most people who distribute
> > crypto software openly.
>
> And we mostly have Dan Bernstein to thank for this!    Kudos to Dan.

Yup. Although a lot of people were standing behind him, he was the
one who led the charge to reverse the nonsense that was law at the
time.

At my office we have a Bernstein/EFF poster at our front door to
remind us from time to time oh how things could have been without
proper freedoms.

Tom
First  |  Prev  | 
Pages: 1 2 3
Prev: why does PKCS#1 use the LCM instead of Euler's totient function?
Next: Asymmetric key length recommendations