Re: Clipper III on the table

[Ernest Hua <hua@chromatic.com>]

> > > Even the promise (of no limits) might suffice.
> > 
> > Don't bet on it.
>
> Allow me to say here that I do not belive that Netscape will be amongst
> those fooled so easily. But IBM, HP, TIS, and others have already been
> fooled. The USG does not need to get every software company to agree with

I don't think it's a matter of being fooled.

IBM and HP have very large federal systems divisions.  They are also
fighting for more (and hold on to current) financial sector customers.

The government currently has a huge strangle hold on that market in
terms of regulatory agencies/policies that will not be loosened very
easily (assuming one believes that it should be loosened, which I do
not necessarily agree with).

Therefore, it is definitely in IBM's and HP's interest to build
systems that the government likes.  It is also important for them to
point out that such systems are very vulnerable given the previous
policies.  This new GAK ("GAKR"??) will actually be quite appropriate
in terms of a right "balance" for the financial sector.  In fact, I
would expect the financial sector to have to open its transactions to
not just the FBI/CIA/DEA, but the SEC and other non-law-enforcement
agencies.

The question is:  Why is this GAKR appropriate for the rest of us?
Why do we want it?

It really does harm the "small" companies like Netscape because they
don't have as much resources to establish the infrastructure
necessary for GAKR, and their target markets are not in bed with the
local governments.  Instead, their target markets are anyone who
wants to buy, and no one, when it comes to their personal privacy
would want to buy something to which the U.S. government has a
guaranteed backdoor.

I predict, therefore, Netscape and RSA would NOT capitulate to this
latest bitter carrot.

Ern