Re: [9fans] "part 772"

Re: [9fans] "part 772"

[Lucio De Re]

On Sun, Feb 23, 2003 at 08:03:59AM -0500, David Presotto wrote:
>
> Sorry about that, fixed.  Not that it's a very exciting document
> to look at, but every other security disclaimer page mentions it
> so I thought it was worth seeing what it meant.
>
I was merely curious about New Zealand being exempted, when its
armament legislation forbids docking to US (and other) nuclear
powered ships.

Ideally, if New Zealand and many others are exempted, I see little
reason for South Africa not to request exemption too.  Of course,
I have no idea what's involved, but if our government is looking
for yet another alternative to monopoly software, I'd be glad to
help them along.

++L

Re: [9fans] "part 772"

[Skip Tavakkolian]

> I rechecked the country list.  I was afraid France, Germany,
> NYC and San Francisco might have been moved to the
> banned list these last few weeks but neither in nor
> the goveernment end-use list has changed.

It might soon only allow export to two countries, the
B. R. of Texas and the B. R. of Florida, a.k.a Bush countries.

(B. R. is Banana Republic, no offense to the banana)

Re: [9fans] "part 772"

[David Presotto]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 474 bytes --]

I rechecked the country list.  I was afraid France, Germany,
NYC and San Francisco might have been moved to the
banned list these last few weeks but neither in nor
the goveernment end-use list has changed.

If anyone can find a pointer on what treaties define
the EU+8 that allowed government end-use of US encryption
software, I'll stick a pointer on the page.  Without
checking the lists closely, it looks like the EU+8
covers NATO members plus US pacific allies.

[-- Attachment #2: Type: message/rfc822, Size: 2566 bytes --]

From: Lucio De Re <lucio@proxima.alt.za>
To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu
Subject: Re: [9fans] "part 772"
Date: Sun, 23 Feb 2003 15:10:11 +0200
Message-ID: <20030223151011.A15898@cackle.proxima.alt.za>

On Sun, Feb 23, 2003 at 08:03:59AM -0500, David Presotto wrote:
>
> Sorry about that, fixed.  Not that it's a very exciting document
> to look at, but every other security disclaimer page mentions it
> so I thought it was worth seeing what it meant.
>
I was merely curious about New Zealand being exempted, when its
armament legislation forbids docking to US (and other) nuclear
powered ships.

Ideally, if New Zealand and many others are exempted, I see little
reason for South Africa not to request exemption too.  Of course,
I have no idea what's involved, but if our government is looking
for yet another alternative to monopoly software, I'd be glad to
help them along.

++L

Re: [9fans] "part 772"

[David Presotto]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1267 bytes --]

Sorry about that, fixed.  Not that it's a very exciting document
to look at, but every other security disclaimer page mentions it
so I thought it was worth seeing what it meant.

"Government end-user" (as applied to
encryption items). A government end-user is any
foreign central, regional or local government
department, agency, or other entity performing
governmental functions; including governmental
research institutions,  governmental corporations
or their separate business units (as defined in part
772 of the EAR) which are engaged in the
manufacture or distribution of items or services
controlled on the Wassenaar Munitions List, and
international governmental organizations.  This
term does not include: utilities (including
telecommunications companies and Internet
service providers); banks and financial institutions;
transportation; broadcast or entertainment;
educational organizations; civil health and medical
organizations; retail or wholesale firms; and
manufacturing or industrial entities not engaged in
the manufacture or distribution of items or
services controlled on the Wassenaar Munitions
List.

You'll have to look elsewhere for the Wassenar Munitions
List.  I did once and it was long and not too
surprising.

[-- Attachment #2: Type: message/rfc822, Size: 2112 bytes --]

From: Lucio De Re <lucio@proxima.alt.za>
To: 9fans mailing list <9fans@cse.psu.edu>
Subject: [9fans] "part 772"
Date: Sun, 23 Feb 2003 13:45:19 +0200
Message-ID: <20030223134517.Z15898@cackle.proxima.alt.za>

I actually got curious and clicked on the "part 772" link in the

	<http://plan9.bell-labs.com/plan9dist/newaccount.html>

document.  The results were definitely not encouraging :-)

	this database not listed in database.lst [bxa]
	docid-> f:772.wais
	IPaddress->
	dbname-> 2003

I imagine that few need the information, but there may be some that
do, maybe even in my neighbourhood.

++L

[9fans] "part 772"

[Lucio De Re]

I actually got curious and clicked on the "part 772" link in the

	<http://plan9.bell-labs.com/plan9dist/newaccount.html>

document.  The results were definitely not encouraging :-)

	this database not listed in database.lst [bxa]
	docid-> f:772.wais
	IPaddress->
	dbname-> 2003

I imagine that few need the information, but there may be some that
do, maybe even in my neighbourhood.

++L