home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Xref: sparky sci.crypt:3121 alt.security:4266
- Newsgroups: sci.crypt,alt.security
- Path: sparky!uunet!seas.smu.edu!utacfd.uta.edu!rwsys!sneaky!gordon
- From: gordon@sneaky.lonestar.org (Gordon Burditt)
- Subject: Re: Are DES restriction even logically sound?
- Message-ID: <Bu5597.3x4@sneaky.lonestar.org>
- Organization: Gordon Burditt
- References: <1992Sep5.164646.21443@uwm.edu>
- Date: Sun, 6 Sep 1992 05:14:54 GMT
- Lines: 27
-
- > Supposing I have a complete description of DES in text form, and I split it
-
- It is my understanding that a description of DES in text form is not
- restricted, as long as it is not a software implementation of DES. Byte
- Magazine already published one quite a few years back. (I forget whether
- there was a full software implementation included or not. There probably
- was, in something like 6800 assembly language.) And it's my understanding
- that the Feds would think nothing of responding to a request for the
- appropriate FIPS or whatever standard, with the return address of KGB
- headquarters in Moscow, by sending the document. This was back when
- the Soviet Union existed and was considered an "Evil Empire".
-
- >into 8 parts, with file N containing every 8th character modulo N.
-
- > If 100 people each decide to post one of these files (they make a random
- >choice without knowing about the other 99 people even being there), and posts
- >it to a place that can be publically accessed outside the US, then have any
- >restrictions on DES been violated? If so, who violated them? How?
-
- I believe this is called a conspiracy. It's probably illegal REGARDLESS OF
- WHAT THE TEXT CONTAINED, even if it's a complete but PG-rated description
- of Clinton's first post-marital sex, the Constitution of the United States,
- or the text of one of Bush's speeches. I think you're legally much safer
- posting the plaintext.
-
- Gordon L. Burditt
- sneaky.lonestar.org!gordon
-