Re: FC: More on Network Associates and its crypto-politics

[Declan McCullagh <declan@well.com>]

If anonymous has any evidence that TIS' policy has changed from earlier
this year, I'd like to hear it.

I guess if anonymous wants to call me an "extremist," I'll take it as a
compliment. Personally I think of myself as pragmatic.

-Declan


At 08:03 PM 11-18-98 +0100, Anonymous wrote:
>Declan McCullagh writes:
>
>>TIS supports export controls on encryption products. My article:
>> http://www.well.com/user/declan/pubs/cwd.shadow.cryptocrats.0298.txt
>
>Two problems here.  First, you are using the present tense in saying that
>TIS "supports" export controls, but your article is from nine months ago.
>There have been many changes since then, including loosening of the crypto
>export rules, the acquisition of TIS by Network Associates, and a recent
>statement that TIS has backed off from its leadership role in advocating
>key recovery.  What is TIS's current policy?  It certainly sounds like
>it is changing.  You should find out before claiming to know what it is.
>
>Second, even in the context of last February, what you wrote is:
>
>> Some of the firms selected also endorse restrictions. Trusted Information 
>> Systems recently circulated a policy paper calling for "sensible" 
>> legislation to "make the export of 56-bit current interim DES controls 
>> permanent and permit the export of stronger encryption when it is combined 
>> with a key recovery system." (Which, coincidentally, TIS is happy to sell 
>> you...)
>
>At the time, this would have represented a LIBERALIZATION of export laws.
>56 bit exports were only allowed in the context of a promise to add key
>recovery even for 56 bit keys.  The statement you have quoted calls for
>allowing 56 bit key export permanently, and only requiring key recovery
>for stronger encryption.  True, it was not a call for full elimination
>of restrictions, but it was a step in the right direction.
>
>You are falling into the tiresome pattern of extremists who claim that
>moderates are lackeys for the other side.  It's like an anti-abortion
>fanatic who says that those who oppose murdering abortion doctors are
>baby killers.  Try reporting the facts instead of altering them to fit
>your biased views.
>