Re: LYNX-DEV dodging the gun

[Gregory S. Stark]

address@hidden (Larry W. Virden, x2487) writes:
> Of course, one could argue that a similar action could be taken to
> create an equivalent to SSL.

PGP was legally exported by printing "PGP: the book" containing all the source
in machine-parsable form. Then having people outside the US scan it in and
laboriously check the result for typos.

In the case of SSL there's no need to do anything so elaborate. Programmers
outside the US are equally capable of writing crypto code. In fact an
implementation already exists that was programmed entirely in Australia. It
would be quite easy to base a LynxSSL on this freely distributable
implementation. Commercial SSL products are available outside the US already
and have been given quite a boost by not having to compete with American
products.

If we want a widely distributable LynxSSL we have only to find non-US
programmers to do the work and non-US ftp servers to serve it from. Despite
Wooley's arguments the consensus is that US export law would only interfere
with the GPL for Americans, who might have to be careful not to distribute
versions compiled with SSL. For people outside the US there's no problem.

greg