Re: So, what crypto legislation (if any) is necessary?

[Adam Shostack <adam@lighthouse.homeport.org>]

Timothy C. May wrote:

| My point is that I see no compelling legislation that is needed. If enough
| people in Washington really want increased length in _exported products_
| (remember the "exported" part), the Congress and the President should find
| it easy enough to get said products on to the Approved List. (I note that
| the Leahy Bill really doesn't change this system anyway...some products go
| on the list, some don't...the law only seems to say that when the horse has
| already left the barn, i.e., when "comparable" products are already in
| fairly wide use outside the U.S., then the products should be put on the
| approved list. Big deal.

	Tim,

	I'm forced to disagree on this point.  I think that the
comparable product has the potential to be a very big deal; it means
that any product using IDEA or 3DES may become exportable, because
such products are available outside the US.

	It may be that wide use will be quibbled over, but DES, weak
as it is, is widely used outside the US, and IDEA and 3DES will be.
Thats why this legistlation will fail to pass.

Adam

-- 
"It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once."
					               -Hume