vireillä sopimus (ja vastustava kampanja) on tosiaan ollut jo pidempään,
mutta nyt on taitanut alkaa tapahtua.
~
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Mon, 07 Dec 1998 21:01:17 +0200
From: . <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: sfnet.keskustelu.tietoverkot, sfnet.atk.turvallisuus,
sfnet.keskustelu.laki, sfnet.keskustelu.yhteiskunta
Subject: Wassenaar ja kryptokaupan rajoitus
Wassenaar kauppasopimus, jonka Suomi on nyt allekirjoittanut, ilmeisesti todella
rajoittaa kryptosoftalla käytävää kauppaa. Kuulemma SSH on saanut hallitukselta
vahvistuksen, että massoille jaettavat ohjelmat saisivat tukea vain 56-bitin
(heikkoa) suojausta. Toisaalta sanotaan, ettei Wassenaar ole lainopillisesti
sitova.
Ensi käden tietoa minulla ei asiasta ole, vaikka olen syksyn ollutkin
icrypto-listalla Suomen vastaavana juuri tämän Wassenaarin osalta. Alla viestit
joita lähetin aiheista muutamalle listalle, että tulevat näillekin forumeille.
Toivottavasti crosspostaus menee oikein .. ei ole kokemusta tästä softasta.
Palasin juuri matkalta, enkä ole muutenkaan ehtinyt oikein hoitamaan asiaa, vaan
hallituksen tiedonantojen jälkeen tuudittautunut ilmeisesti virheelliseen
turvallisuudentunteeseen :(
---cut---
Date: Mon, 7 Dec 1998 19:47:29 +0200 (EET)
From: .
To: GILC
icrypto
Cc: [email protected]
[email protected]
idea@netppl
Subject: Wassenaar in Finland
Wassenaar is now in the news in Finland. (at least at
http://duuni.net/users/news/news_lue.cgi?key1200 for members, in
Finnish). You've probably read already how Tatu Ylönen from SSH has
commented this.
Restricting crypto trade is strongly against the government policies that
were published earlier this autumn. After some of those announcements I
felt pretty comfortable about the whole issue myself and didn't do much
about it at all. What a mistake?
~
---more---
Date: Mon, 7 Dec 1998 20:20:26 +0200 (EET)
From: . <@netppl>
To: [email protected]
[email protected]
Subject: [ICRYPTO] Call to arms on Wassenaar (fwd)
Laitoin tänne sen edellisen gilc/icrypto-listoille menneen viestin CC:nä,
ja kun siinä viitattiin noihin Ylösen puheisiin (hän on keskustellut
asiasta hallituksen tyyppien kanssa) niin laitanpa nekin tänne tiedoksi.
EFA:n (~ Australian EFF) Michael Bakerin viestinhän laitoin aiemmin
syksyllä, siitä tuli palautettakin. Alla pari muutakin linkkiä aiheeseen:
http://www.efa.org.au/ (tuo EFA)
http://www.gilc.org/ (Global Internet Libery Campaign)
http://www.wassenaar.org/ (itse sopimus)
josta linkki -> http://www.vn.fi/ktm/vientiv/
Kuten tuossa viimeisessä selvällä suomen kielellä selvitetään, pointtina
touhussa ns. kaksikäyttötuotteet, eli yksinkertaistettuna sellaiset joita
voi käyttää niin hyvään kuin pahaankin (eh). Tuossa mainitaan "yleistä
sotilaallista toimintakykyä edistävät kaksikäyttötuotteet" joihon vahva
salaus voidaan katsoa kuuluvan.
Alla siis gilc/icrypto listojen kirjeenvaihtoa jossa quotataan Gilmoren
kautta Ylösen kommentteja. Jutun mukaan SSH on saanut hallitukselta
vahvistuksen, että massakryptotuotteet pitäisi rajoittaa 56-bittiin.
Ilmeisesti Wassenaar ei kuitenkaan ole lainopillisesti sitova tms.
~
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Mon, 7 Dec 1998 19:50:27 +0200 (EET)
From: . <@netppl>
Reply-To: [email protected]
To: idea@netppl
Subject: [ICRYPTO] Call to arms on Wassenaar (fwd)
tuossa on icrypto-listan, jolla olen ollut Suomen edustajana, sunnuntainen
Wassenaar-info jossa Gilmoren viestissä quotataan SSH:n Tatu Ylöstä joka
on keskustellut asiasta Suomen hallituksen edustajien kanssa.
tuo Gilmore muuten on Sunin työntekijä nro 6. tms ja mm. alt.*
news-hierarkian kehittäjä. jotain muutakin se oli tehnyt mutta enpä muista
mitä. http://an.org/inet98/pictures/Aut_0003.jpg se kuitenkin on tuossa
keskellä ylhäällä hymyilemässä :)
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Sun, 06 Dec 1998 10:58:28 +1000
From: Greg Taylor <gtaylor@efa>
Reply-To: icrypto@efa
To: icrypto@efa
gilc-plan@gilc
Cc: gnu@toad
Subject: [ICRYPTO] Call to arms on Wassenaar
Resent-Date: Sun, 6 Dec 1998 08:58:52 +0800
Resent-From: icrypto@
Attached is a commentary from John Gilmore that asks some pertinent
questions about what is really going on.
I agree with his view that we need to raise a hue and cry in each country.
We need to get to the agency responsible for crypto policy in each country
and get their interpretation of the Wassenaar outcome, and whether any
changes to existing policy are likely. It's not that hard to reach these
people, and we're talking about public policy issues, not government
secrets here, so they have to come clean if pushed hard enough. Political
action is also needed, since those countries that still pay lip service to
the democratic model will require legislation to be passed.
In Australia, few politicians understand the crypto issue, so they take
advice from the bureaucrats, in our case the national security agency, DSD.
EFA started a public campaign a few months ago to try to inject an
alternative view into the debate. It was interrupted by a federal election
but is about to ramp up again.
We all need to go public with media releases etc. I think we can make very
effective use of David Aaron's spin doctoring - i.e. run the US imperialism
angle. Industry organsiations also need to be contacted, since any changes
will affect them. Moves to "level the playing field" as Aaron implies,
will only serve to increase US domination of the software industry. We can
leverage on that too.
I'd like to see a GILC member statement later this week too, once we get a
better picture on what actually happened in Vienna, and what the affect
will be.
Greg
-------------------------------
Greg Taylor
Electronic Frontiers Australia
http://www.efa.org.au
==================================================================>From cryptography-owner@c2 Sun Dec 6 02:08:05 1998
>To: cypherpunks@toad, cryptography@c2
>Subject: What was the quid pro quo for Wassenaar countries?
>Date: Fri, 04 Dec 1998 18:40:15 -0800
>From: John Gilmore <gnu@toad>
>Sender: owner-cryptography@
>
>I spoke some hours ago with Tatu Ylonen in Finland. His company has
>confirmation from the Finnish government that the government agreed to
>a proposal to limit mass-market crypto exports to 56 bits. Perhaps
>he or someone else from SSH can post more details.
>
>So *something* really did happen at the Wassenaar meeting, but we
>don't know two important things:
>
> * What exactly did they agree to? In particular, is public
> domain -- as opposed to mass market -- crypto controlled?
>
> * And what did NSA offer, to convince many countries to
> directly contradict policies that they had arrived at
> during year-long public consultations with their own citizens?
> A carrot? A stick? Blackmail from wiretaps? Access
> to NSA's wiretap network in return for cooperation?
> What was the strong motivation for so many countries to go
> against their own economic and self-determination interests?
>
>It was pointed out to me that the Wassenaar Arrangement has no legal
>effect. Each country has to go back and amend its own local controls.
>However, I personally saw cases more than a year ago where both Japan
>and Belgium were restricting bona fide civilian crypto transactions
>"because Wassenaar requires us to" when in fact it didn't. This
>development will give these countries much more "cover" to implement
>draconian policies, under secret arm-twisting from the US.
>
>We will have to fight this one in the trenches, in each country.
>First step is to raise a hue and cry and put each government on the
>defensive (as they well ought to be). Then let's find out what "deal"
>they made with the devil. Finally let's see whether, as Perry says,
>civil rights and political processes work, and the will of the people
>will actually end up codified in the laws of each country. Or not.
>
> John
>
>PS: I particularly like Ambassador Aaron's characterization that
>this new development will help US industry, by censoring foreign crypto
>publishers in the same way the US government censors US publishers.
>A giant step forward for freedom and commerce everywhere, eh Mr. Aaron?
>What an incredibly talented liar, I mean diplomat, he is.
>
[This is the Perry Metzger statement to which John refers above:]
====================================
>From cryptography-owner@ Sat Dec 5 10:33:45 1998
To: cryptography@
Subject: my two cents
Reply-To: perry@piermont
X-Reposting-Policy: redistribute only with permission
From: "Perry E. Metzger" <perry@piermont>
Date: 04 Dec 1998 19:27:44 -0500
Lines: 23
Sender: owner-cryptography@
The new Wassenar abomination has to be the end of this, one way or
another.
Supposedly, the United States is a democracy. Supposedly, elected
officials are supposed to respond to the desires of the electorate,
not the desires of the National Security Agency.
It is time that we explained, clearly and distinctly, to the
legislative branch that this is *not* a joke, that "balancing the
interests of law enforcement" is not what the electorate wants, that
the law enforcement officials have no interests of their own and are
ALSO the employees of the people.
Either we find out that the U.S. Government is government of the
bureaucrats, by the bureaucrats, for the bureaucrats, or we get our
way -- but either way, it is finally, in my opinion, the time for us
to quit pussyfooting around, quit trying to appease people, and to
just come out and say "cryptography controls are stupid, and we, the
people, do not want them, and we don't CARE what the NSA wants, they
work for *us*, not the other way around."
Perry
---end---
Saapa nähdä mitä tästä tulee.
-
., http://www.tol.oulu.fi/~/
Oulun yliopisto, tietojenkäsittylopin laitos
