12/3    The Wassenaar agreement has been signed; approximately speaking, it
        is a treaty which will require other countries to impose US-style
        export controls on cryptography.  http://www.wassenaar.org
        \_ Damn Republicans.  They had to start this whole anti-
           cryptography crap.  I can't believe Clinton actually
           supports them too.
                \_ Going back to the clipper chip this was always a big
                   Clinton issue.
        \_ It's so ironic that the US is the only democratic government
           in the world that is so paranoid about public use of public
           key cryptography.
           \_ It's for your protection.
              \_ If owning a public key is criminal, only criminals will own
                 a public key.
              \_ Outlaw public key crytography.  Great, now no one can
                 use pgp and ssh and people who do 'require' ssh and ssl
                 (like sysadmins) can't use them anymore.  And yes there
                 are a lot of non-government systems that do require
                 encryption.  Speaking of protection, do you think if
                 you outlaw pub key crytography that criminals or
                 terrorists won't try to get there hands on it.  Now
                 you've just outlawed legitimate use of the technology
                 and let criminals use it.  Read up on it more and
                 you'll see why outlawing it is such a bad idea.
                 /ftp/pub/cypherpunks
                 \_ I think you are responding to a joke.
                    \_ Yes, it was a joke.  Too bad some people just don't
                       get it.  Lighten up folks.
                       \_ ah yes, that was just so hillarious i forgot to
                          laugh.
                        \_ No, you're just a friggin' idiot with no sense
                           of humor and lacking the slightest shred of what
                           might pass for intelligence at the dismal pit
                           Berkeley has become at the undergraduate level.
                           \_ tom, is that you again?  What did I tell
                              about judging other people's sense of humor
        \_ If I was a criminal and I really wanted strong encryption why
           couldn't I just code up the RSA public key cryptography algorithm?
           Granted it might take a little while but my point is that anyone
           who wants strong cryptography can write it themselves.
           Do the anti-crypto people have an argument against this?
           \_ It's not as easy as it seems to code these algorithms.  There's
                 on cryptography.  Nevertheless, he studied in enough
              all kinds of attacks that don't necessarily involve breaking
              the underlying math.  It's definitely possible, but I think
              that it's only feasable for criminals who can hire people with
              the appropriate fu.    - mikeym
              \_ Actually, it is as easy as it seems.  The original creator
                 of PGP was Phil Zimmerman who himself was not an expert
                 on cryptography.  Nevertheless, he studied it in enough
                 and consulted enough people about any loopholes in his
                 program that he finally came up with a product that is
                 now widely used.  All from a joe schmo who graduated
                 from U.Florida with a B.S. in computer science.
                 \_ I don't think that PGP has the NSA quaking in its boots.
              \_ But the threat of public key cryptography comes not from
                 individual terrorists (I don't think Timothy McVeigh
                 used pgp) but from other countries and their military,
                 which are competent enough to implement a robust
                 cryptographic system if they wanted to without the help
                              can keep recompiling and changing the key size
                 of anyone in the US.  Which is why banning public key
                 cryptography is pointless.
                 \_ Yes, this is true, but my point was that it requires
                    more than the common criminal can do.  Not just "anyone"
                    can do it.  I would even guess that many governments would
                    have trouble outsmarting the NSA.  - mikeym
                    \_ The "common" criminal is a purse snatcher or car
                       jacker.  It's likely the only computer they ever owned
                       was the one stolen from your apartment.
                        \_ Read what I was replying to: "anyone who wants
                           strong cryptography can write it themselves."  This
                           is FALSE.  It requires a lot of knowledge and
                           intelligence.  That was my WHOLE point.  - mikeym
                           \_ You didn't have a point.
                           \_ Any moron can download and compile the
                              int'l version of PGP. And of course they
                              can keep recompiling and increasing the key size
                              (for use amongst themselves) forever.
                                \_ PGP is the height of security?
                                   \_ It's "pretty good", no more, no less.
              \_ So it is not a technical problem but a money one? -jon