Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site utcsri.UUCP Path: utzoo!utcsri!outer From: outer@utcsri.UUCP (Richard Outerbridge) Newsgroups: net.crypt,net.unix Subject: Re: Xenix & crypt Message-ID: <950@utcsri.UUCP> Date: Sun, 31-Mar-85 18:46:43 EST Article-I.D.: utcsri.950 Posted: Sun Mar 31 18:46:43 1985 Date-Received: Mon, 1-Apr-85 10:47:46 EST References: <111@loonam.UUCP> <560@utcs.UUCP> Reply-To: outer@utcsri.UUCP (Richard Outerbridge) Distribution: net Organization: CSRI, University of Toronto Lines: 20 Keywords: Export controls, Silliness, Free trade. Summary: Like as not bureaucracy. This sounds silly. The DES ("dez") can be freely exported for use in Canada (by specific exemption from U.S. controls); crypt(1) is 'classified'? Hmmmm. Unless, of course, the DES is even weaker than crypt(1). Unlikely. More to the point it may be a simple matter of bureaucracy. If no blanket exemption from export controls is available, than the onus may fall on the exporter to get a permit for each and every exportee. So perhaps 'classified' means 'proprietary' (not already in the public domain - crypt(1): Bell trade secret!) and no one wants to bother getting formal approval for export to each foreign licensee. Notice, by the way, ye fans of free trade, that while Canadian export regulations put no control on cryptographic data exported from here to south of the 49th, I don't think it works the other way round. So much for reciprocity. -- Richard Outerbridge (416) 961-4757 Payload Deliveries: N 41 39'36", W 79 23'42", Elev. 106.47m.