[ga] cryptography etc. & Policy etc.

[Eric Dierker <eric@hi-tek.com>]

Roberto et al,

You are very right here. This one of those areas where us policy wogs need to
interface more with the techies. Again misunderstanding and disinformation are
at the crux of this issue.

U.S. policy in general allows for e-commerce cryptography to freely flow, that
is a generality.  U.S. policy is more concerned with capacity than encryption,
again a generality and my use of capacity is intentionally vague.

We have to keep in mind just as IP interests are by far the strongest
"lobbyists" for UDRP matters so they are for commerce.  e-commerce encryption
helps the flow of goods and money and therefor is good for overall commerce. Of
course the U.S. is all for this precept. Now national secret type cryptology is
another story but that involves capacity(again vague).

I mentioned cookies in my earlier post which I am sure some found quite out of
context.  But it is not.  Transnational cookiedom is a possible problem.
Electronic Identification of international citizens on a non transparent basis
is a policy nightmare when it comes to privacy.

I am sure I have bored you all to tears.  If this thread continues I will be
happy to provide some URLS to further the marketing.  Remember marketing is
education and education is marketing and it should be accomplished inside-out
and outside-in across all borders political and physical.

Sincerely,
Eric

Roberto Gaetano wrote:

> Stefan,
>
> You wrote:
> >
> >I am not sure, whether this is the right venue to discuss .vn issues.
> >
>
> Well, the subject has been brought up in support for a nomination by the GA,
> and I don't see how the continuation of the debate could be ruled out of
> order.
>
> Also, there have been some interesting developments, like the question from
> WXW to you about cryptography below:
>
> [WXW wrote, quoting you:]
> > > On-line credit-card payments need https protocol, which includes
> > > encryption. Encryption is by the letter of the rules usually illegal
> >(all
> > > the customers would need a permission). Will Hi-Tek get the rules
> >changed
> > > first, or just produce again another factum which defies the rules?
> >
> >Where do you get this from?
> >
> >Encryption is not illegal.  It think you have a misunderstanding here.
> >High grade encryption was illegal to export from the US, but
> >SSL/https protocols were still available, and are still available.
> >And in any event, the US has relaxed the export controls extensively.
> >With the exception of a few countries now, the browser makers can
> >distribute high level encryption with their products to anyone (And
> >do).
> >
>
> I just assume that you mean that encripted transmission is currently illegal
> in VietNam, but I am curious to hear your authoritative answer, and I am
> sure that the issue about different local laws influencing the Internet is
> of interest to most of the people in the GA.
>
> Best regards
> Roberto
>
> PS: How are things in the ISTF?
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com

--
This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html