[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Laws Outside the U.S.
[email protected] (Timothy C. May) writes:
: > It would be interesting for those in other jurisdictions to comment about
: > how *their* rulers might view anonymous communications and strong crypto.
: I heartily agree with Duncan here! There has been very little said by
: the good residents of France, Germany, Sweden, Holland, Italy, etc.
: about just what the crypto-related laws of their countries are.
: So, I appreciate that some of our European readers may be tired of
: hearing about U.S. policy or proposed laws, but the proper solution is
: _competing speech_. That is, give us something new to talk about. Tell
: us about what *your* country is doing. Tell us about any laws limiting
: what kind of modems can be hooked up to your PTTs, as a concrete
: example. Tell us about the raids on BBSs in Italy. Tell us about the
: rumor that the Netherlands plans to ban unapproved crypto.
There was a draft for a proposal for a law that would have
outlawed crypto in the Netherlands. It would only be legal
to use crypto if you had deposited the KEYs and if you had
received a license. The use, trade and possesion of crypto
It would be illegal (to dutch law) to have cryptosoftware
available at some ftp-site (somewhere in the world) that
would be accesable from the Netherlands (really!).
(laws and enforcement of those laws are two -totally-
different things in Holland :))
The draft was revoked, due to the huge amount of protest',
the good thing is that we are in the proces of founding the
dutch equivelant of the EFF: "de db.nl".
Some loose thoughts any comments ?
There are basicly four scenario's that a state can follow to
- outlaw it totally
This was the path Holland choose briefly.
- key depositing
This is what the US is trying to do with Clipper et al.
- try to develop a standart
This is what the US did with DES and is trying to do
now with Clipper.
- do nothing
The most prosperous scenario. Crypto use will boom, but
lawenforcement agencies will be deprived from a useful
tool, they can't bug phones any more. That will hinder
their investigations but advancements in hardware/software
could balance that: it is more easy to localise phonecalls,
bugging equipment has become smaller and more powerful.
Lawenforcement agencies have computerised databases that can
link fingerprints, names etc in near "real-time". Large scale
use of crypto could balance out some of the recent advancements
in information technology that have given them a clear edge.
Exit! Stage Left.
Alex de Joode <[email protected]>