Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 07 Feb 2000 16:54:16 -0800 | From | "H. Peter Anvin" <> | Subject | Re: Encrypted File systems implementation into the kernel? |
| |
kernel@draper.net wrote: > > Under the circumstances, the European finance and e-business industries > would have to be crazy to use U.S. crypto-based products. And they're > not crazy. > > To play in this business in the rest of the world, the U.S. will have to > have a clear, consistent, and favorable policy, and U.S. companies will > have to present products that are demonstrably strong with no trap doors. > (I invite you to speculate if this will happen before Hell frezes over.) > In the meantime, there are plenty of non-U.S. products to choose from, and > banks like UBS, Credit Suisse, Grupo Intesa, Societe General, Deutsche > Bank, Generale Bank, Bank Austria, and Barclays are not sitting back > anxiously waiting for U.S. products to become available. They're doing > business with non-U.S. products that are just fine, thank you. > </Quote> > > U.S. regulators continue to place limitations on conditions by which > crypto implementations may be released, presumably with an eye towards > preservation of evesdropping ability. Therefore, I urge that crypto > functionality NOT be made subject to U.S. regulation, and therefore NOT > be rolled into U.S. based kernel source trees. > > Once the free world (Zurich?) begins to accept that U.S. based crypto > executables and source is untainted by government mandated "review"... > then, and only then, should we revisit this question. >
We're not submitting anything for government review... except what the rest of the world sees. We're Open Source, and we shouldn't implement anything but fully transparent peer-reviewed algorithms available in the open literature.
-hpa
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |