[2008-11-17 note: See update at bottom for new URL and submission e-mail address details.]


From rick Wed Feb 27 00:28:17 2002
Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2002 00:28:17 -0800
To: luv@luv.asn.au
Subject: Re: VPN software
User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.27i

Quoting Mike MacCana: (mikem@cyber.com.au):

[FreeS/WAN:]

> Red Hat: US based, so it doesn't come with the distro.

FYI, benighted USA crypto-export laws are no longer a serious obstacle to open-source crypto.

USA's Federal Commerce Department modified on 2000-10-19 its Bureau of Export Administration's (BXA's) Encryption Items regulation to allow the basically free export of binaries based on open source[1] source code, requiring only the usual notification e-mail to BXA. This is a further modification to a liberalisation, earlier that year, of controls over open source crypto in source-code form (the "TSU" exception to export controls).

You can read about that, here:
http://www.bxa.doc.gov/Encryption/EncryptionRuleOct2K.html

Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer, let alone an expert reader of Federal tea leaves.

[1] Naturally, they don't use anyone else's definition of open source, but felt obliged to invent their own bizarre definition, encompassing software for which no fee or payment is required for object code (other than reasonable and customary fees for reproduction and distribution).

-- 
Cheers,                    Remember:  The day after tomorrow is the third day
Rick Moen                  of the rest of your life.
rick@linuxmafia.com




[2008-11-17 note: See update at bottom for new URL and submission e-mail address details.]


From rick Tue Mar 6 15:49:06 2001
Date: Tue, 6 Mar 2001 15:49:06 -0800
To: mr.bad@pigdog.org
Subject: [off-list] Re: [CrackMonkey] He's in!
User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i

[Sending you this off-list:]

> Don't ask me what TSU stands for.

Technology and Software Unrestricted.

> So, Open Source software doesn't have to go through a registration
> process like proprietary software does.

You are correct, sir. Beware, however, that BXA's definition of the term is different from anyone else's.

> HOWEVER, if you read this TSU exception page, it seems that there's a
> requirement to notify a particular email address when you make a piece
> of software available:
>
> http://www.bxa.doc.gov/Encryption/PubAvailEncSourceCodeNofify.html

crypt@bxa.doc.gov, and it's not exactly "when you make a piece of software unavailable", but rather when you become an "exporter" of TSU-covered code. (Be sure to sample the example notices in Matt Blaze's archive, noted below.)

I wrote the following to crackmonkey, last year, when the regulations were last revised:

Date: Sun, 17 Sep 2000 12:08:30 -0700
To: crackmonkey@crackmonkey.org
Subject: Re: [CrackMonkey] Another global networked filesystem

The January regulations were semi-clued in an interesting manner. Quoting the revision to Export Administration Regulations published in the January 14, 2000 Federal Register (Vol. 65, No. 10, page 2492):

Also in section 740.13, to, in part, take into account the "open source" approach to software development, unrestricted encryption source code not subject to an express agreement for the payment of a licensing fee or royalty for commercial production or sale of any product developed using the source code can, without preview, be released from "EI" [encryption items] controls and exported and re-exported under License Exception TSU. Intellectual property protection (e.g., copyright, patent, or trademark) would not, by itself, be construed as an express agreement for the payment of a licensing fee or royalty for commercial production or sale of any product developed using the source code. To qualify, exporters must notify BXA [Bureau of Export Administration] of the Internet location (e.g., URL or Internet address) or provide a copy of the source code by the time of export. These notifications are only required for the initial export; there are no notification
requirements for end-users subsequently using the source code. Notification can be made by e-mail to

This is at http://www.bxa.doc.gov/Encryption/regs.htm .

Cryptographer Matt Blaze has set up a remailer alias at "exports@crypto.com". Anyone wanting to send the BXA notice under "15 CFR Part 734, as revised on January 14, 2000" is invited to use that alias, which auto-appends your text to a public archive of such posts at http://www.crypto.com/exports/, in addition to sending them to the BXA.

Just for fun, I have my own alias, "nsa@linuxmafia.com", which remails to Blaze's alias. Pro bono publico.





[2008-11-17 note: See update at bottom for new URL and submission e-mail address details.]


From rick Wed Sep 6 12:56:47 2000
Date: Wed, 6 Sep 2000 12:56:47 -0700
To: rbraun@cstone.net
Subject: RSA patent & export news
User-Agent: Mutt/1.1.5i

Dear Rolf:

You may (or may not) recall my writing earlier about the RSA patent and BetterTelnet.

(1) This may not be news to you, but RSA Data Security, Inc. has, as of today, donated its U.S. RSA patent to the public domain.

(1a) Therefore, there's no longer any point in RSAREF, anywhere.

(2) I work for VA Linux Systems, Inc. (for whom I don't speak). During some internal discussions here at VA, it emerged that some of our people and some others at Red Hat Software, Inc. have been pushing hard on the Commerce Department's Bureau of Export Administration, to get them to clarify their rules about binary format open-source code. That pushing yielded partial success on July 17:

http://www.bxa.doc.gov/Encryption/July2KProposedRegSum.html

Note the closing sentence: "Additionally, the draft clarifies that object code compiled from source code that is considered publicly available is treated the same as the source code."

Progress is slow, because getting the Feds to concede loss of authority is always. So, at present, the draft has not been approved and only open-source crypto source code may be freely exported.

-- 
Cheers,                   "Teach a man to make fire, and he will be warm 
Rick Moen                 for a day.  Set a man on fire, and he will be warm
rick@linuxmafia.com       for the rest of his life."   -- John A. Hrastar





From rick Thu Sep 7 12:58:11 2000
Date: Thu, 7 Sep 2000 12:58:11 -0700
From: Rick Moen <rick>
To: rbraun@cstone.net
Subject: export news, again
User-Agent: Mutt/1.1.5i

Rolf, if none of this interests you, let me know, and I won't bother you. (I hope it will help you concerning BetterTelnet.)

I've had some odd conversations today about encryption export, here at VA Linux Systems. Not conclusive, but interesting. What follows should probably be treated as mildly confidential (though not secret).

(1) Source Forge's machines here in the USA are now carrying large amounts of strong crypto (source and binaries). It happened passively, and the company legal staff retroactively gave their blessing. (VA Linux Systems created and runs Source Forge, http://www.sourceforge.net/.)

Some months ago, the Mozilla Project interpreted the Jan. 14 Bureau of Export Administration (BXA) regulations as meaning that Mozilla crypto-enabled binaries were allowed, and advised Mozilla mirrors to e-mail BXA agency and inform them of intent to provide these binaries. Source Forge was one of those mirrors.

Shortly thereafter, the OpenBSD Project likewise began mirroring OpenSSL and OpenSSH binary packages. These likewise ended up on Source Forge.

Allegedly, the company lawyers advised that, since we do not hide what we do, ended up carrying binaries just by carrying on normal operation without heroic measures to prevent it, and will gladly take immediate action to remove any material if officially instructed, we're covered. Other questions, such as whether and how VA will offer open-source strong crypto for its Linux system load, remain undecided.

I've been pushing for a resolution on the latter matter in particular, and will be heading a round-table discussion on it this evening, immediately after work.

-- 
Cheers,                   "Teach a man to make fire, and he will be warm 
Rick Moen                 for a day.  Set a man on fire, and he will be warm
rick@linuxmafia.com       for the rest of his life."   -- John A. Hrastar




[2008-11-17 note: See update at bottom for new URL and submission e-mail address details.]


From rick Thu Nov 30 19:32:45 2000
Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2000 19:32:45 -0800
To: rbraun@cstone.net
Subject: New BXA crypto regulation (good news)
User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i

Hello, Rolf. You may remember me as a fellow working for VA Linux (for whom I'm not speaking), who maintains a list of all known SSH software at http://linuxmafia.com/pub/linux/security/ssh-clients , and who offered you some unsolicited information about Commerce Department matters.

Well, there is news.

http://www.bxa.doc.gov/Encryption/EncryptionRuleOct2K.html or http://www.bxa.doc.gov/Encryption/pdfs/EncryptionRuleOct2K.pdf has the text of the Oct. 19 regulation revision, which amends Sec. 740.13 covering the TSU (Technology and Software Unrestricted) exception to EI (encryption items) export controls. The new addition says that, if a codebase's source code meets the provisions of the TSU exception -- no fee or payment required other than resaonable and customary fees for reproduction and distribution, and crypt@bxa.doc.gov has been notified about the planned public availability -- then object code compiled from that source code may be exported under the same terms.

IANAL, but I estimate as you do that your SSH-enabled BetterTelnet source code qualifies for exception BXA (given notification to the crypt e-mail address). Therefore, your binary code does likewise. Which I believe clears the last obstacle out of your way.

If you give e-mail notice to BXA, I'd urge you to do so through Matt Blaze's mechanism for same. It's explained at http://www.crypto.com/exports/ .

I hope this helps, and hope my mail stands out as useful in a way that all the annoying nag-mail wanting to know when your SSH will be release isn't. ;->

-- 
Cheers,                                      "Reality is not optional."
Rick Moen                                             -- Thomas Sowell
rick@linuxmafia.com




[2008-11-17 note: See update at bottom for new URL and submission e-mail address details.]



Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2002 12:41:10 -0800
To: secureshell@securityfocus.com
Subject: Re: 3DES key-length for data authentication
From: Rick Moen rick@linuxmafia.com

Quoting Hari-Isoft (hari@isofttechindia.com):

> I would like to know the key-length used for 3DES data encryption in
> openssh. I thought that it should be 192 (3 * 64) bits, but the sshd
> man page states 128 bit key used for 3DES.

An old set of notes I have says single DES starts out with 64-bit keys, but it's 56-bit when you account for the parity bit. Thus the raw key-length of 3DES is 56 * 3 = 168 bit. The effective length as implemented (3DES-CBC algorithm?) may be less: Maybe one of the real crypto people will comment.

> Also, I am interested in the export regulations concerning openssh in
> USA.

Quoting from a post I made elsewhere on that subject, two years ago:

---<snip>---

The January [2000] regulations were semi-clued in an interesting manner. Quoting the revision to Export Administration Regulations published in the January 14, 2000 Federal Register (Vol. 65, No. 10, page 2492):

Also in section 740.13, to, in part, take into account the "open source" approach to software development, unrestricted encryption source code not subject to an express agreement for the payment of a licensing fee or royalty for commercial production or sale of any product developed using the source code can, without preview, be released from "EI" [encryption items] controls and exported and re-exported under License Exception TSU. Intellectual property protection (e.g., copyright, patent, or trademark) would not, by itself, be construed as an express agreement for the payment of a licensing fee or royalty for commercial production or sale of any product developed using the source code. To qualify, exporters must notify BXA [Bureau of Export Administration] of the Internet location (e.g., URL or Internet address) or provide a copy of the source code by the time of export. These notifications are only required for the initial export; there are no notification requirements for end-users subsequently using the source code. Notification can be made by e-mail to crypt@bxa.doc.gov . [...]

This is at http://www.bxa.doc.gov/Encryption/regs.htm .

Cryptographer Matt Blaze has set up a remailer alias at
"exports@crypto.com". Anyone wanting to send the BXA notice under "15 CFR Part 734, as revised on January 14, 2000" is invited to use that alias, which auto-appends your text to a public archive of such posts at http://www.crypto.com/exports/, in addition to sending them to the BXA.

Just for fun, I have my own alias, "nsa@linuxmafia.com", which remails to Blaze's alias. Pro bono publico.

---<snip>---


And from a note I wrote to Rolf Braun, author of Better Telnet for MacOS (whose beta supports SSH):

---<snip>---

http://www.bxa.doc.gov/Encryption/EncryptionRuleOct2K.html or http://www.bxa.doc.gov/Encryption/pdfs/EncryptionRuleOct2K.pdf has the text of the Oct. 19 regulation revision, which amends Sec. 740.13 covering the TSU (Technology and Software Unrestricted) exception to EI (encryption items) export controls. The new addition says that, if a codebase's source code meets the provisions of the TSU exception -- no fee or payment required other than resaonable and customary fees for reproduction and distribution, and crypt@bxa.doc.gov has been notified about the planned public availability -- then object code compiled from that source code may be exported under the same terms.

IANAL, but I estimate as you do that your SSH-enabled BetterTelnet source code qualifies for exception BXA (given notification to the crypt e-mail address). Therefore, your binary code does likewise. Which I believe clears the last obstacle out of your way.

If you give e-mail notice to BXA, I'd urge you to do so through Matt Blaze's mechanism for same. It's explained at http://www.crypto.com/exports/ .

---<snip>---


Again, I am not a lawyer, and this message is not legal advice. Businesses contemplating export of strong cryptographic code under the TSU exception to EI export controls should consult competent legal counsel. For one thing, the regulatory category that BXA considers to apply to you may depend on matters external to the nature of your code, e.g., what sort of business you are. I can't predict what these considerations might be, but a good attorney presumably could.

-- 
Cheers,                        Open-source SourceForge retakes the lead:
Rick Moen                      http://gforge.org/  Thank you, Tim Perdue.
rick@linuxmafia.com  

[2008-11-17 Update: The above-mentioned "bxa" (Bureau of Export Administration) Web site and associated e-mail address have vanished since I wrote the above. BXA's function appears to have been transferred to the Commerce Department's Bureau of Industry and Security, and the page about License Exception TSU is now at http://www.bis.doc.gov/encryption/pubavailencsourcecodenofify.html.

At this writing, they now want three copies of the notification mail, to: crypt@bis.doc.gov, enc@nsa.gov, and web_site@bis.doc.gov, with subject header "tsu notification - encryption". See the Web page for further details.]