FC: More on RSA day 3 (no new potato salad news, though)

[Declan McCullagh <declan () well com>]

**********

> Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2000 15:46:52 -0500 (EST)
> From: Lenny Foner <foner () media mit edu>
> To: declan () well com
> Subject: FC: RSA 2000 day 3 conference report from "Ralph" (The Potato
>   Salad Fallout continues)
> CC: foner () media mit edu
>
> Here's what I sent ZD about their shoddy reporting.  Since I see you
> reproduced it intact in a Politech message, I figured I'd send it to
> you, too...
>
> - - - Begin forwarded message - - -
>
> Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2000 15:28:33 -0500 (EST)
> From: Lenny Foner <foner () media mit edu>
> To: patrick_houston () zd com, charles_cooper () zd com
> Subject: Extremely shoddy reporting and editing
>
> It's a pity that, when reporting on a story both as well-known and as
> important us US cryptographic policy, you assigned both a reporter and
> (apparently) and editor who know nothing about the subject.  This
> reflects very badly on ZD and on PC Week (the apparent story source).
> If you do this badly on such stories, I shudder to think how badly you
> do on ones where less is already known by so many.  I almost never
> read PC Week, but after this story, I'm unlikely to recommend that
> anyone I know depend on it for anything, either.
>
> Given that neither the reporter nor PC Week have obvious contact
> addresses, I'm sending this to you, in the hopes that you will send it
> to the relevant parties.
>
> See http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/0,4586,2423792,00.html for
> the story I'm talking about.  Consider the following paragraph from it:
>
>     Zimmerman, as much as anyone in the computer industry, personifies the
>     battle over encryption export regulations. Nearly five years ago,
>     Zimmerman, now a fellow at Network Associates Inc., defied encryption
>     export restrictions and used his PGP encryption across international
>     borders.
>
> This is so wrong-headed, it's hard to believe your reporter was at the
> same conference.  (a) -Sending encrypted messages- has -always- been
> legal.  It is -exporting the software to do so in machine-readable
> form (not paper)- that has been regulated.  (b) Zimmerman has always
> maintained (in public, and in court proceedings) that -he did not
> export- this software.  It was the contention of the Justice Dept that
> he did, but he always maintained that he did not, and that it was any
> one(s) of millions of US Internet users who may have exported it, or
> any overseas Internet user who claimed to be a US citizen and then
> imported it.
>
> Thus, the quote of "...Since his act of civil disobedience," is
> bogus.  If he committed such an act, it was in writing PGP, not in
> using it and not in exporting it.
>
> Hence, "...He finally got to do what he always wanted to do: send an
> encrypted message across international borders and do it legally." is
> also completely wrong.  It's always been legal to do so, and there
> have been -entirely legal- ways that overseas users could have
> interoperated with such PGP messages, for a long time---for example,
> the source code to PGP was -legally- exported, on paper in books,
> years ago, and then scanned back in overseas.
>
> What they -actually- did was to send -a machine-readable copy of the
> *software*- overseas, as the Lofgren quote ("It was a thrill to export
> that crypto,") make clear.
>
> Shame on you.
>
> - - - End forwarded message - - -


--------------------------------------------------------------------------
POLITECH -- the moderated mailing list of politics and technology
To subscribe: send a message to majordomo () vorlon mit edu with this text:
subscribe politech
More information is at http://www.well.com/~declan/politech/
--------------------------------------------------------------------------