<div dir="ltr">Dave,<div><br></div><div>On Sat, Sep 19, 2015 at 4:06 AM, Dave Aitel <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:dave.aitel@gmail.com" target="_blank">dave.aitel@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr">And of course, from the option they are thinking about where they take a softer position of "We are not AT THIS TIME going to legislate, but we want you to backdoor your crypto, pretty please":</div></blockquote></div><div><br></div><div>What is their source for statistics which measured the increased use of cryptosystems and its hinderange US Law Enforcement and is this further broken down into edge cases such as a foreign carrier not responding to a subpoena served internationally?</div><div><br></div><div>On Sat, Sep 19, 2015 at 4:06 AM, Dave Aitel <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:dave.aitel@gmail.com" target="_blank">dave.aitel@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br></div><div><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div>The same thing is true with the Wassenaar export control restrictions on security software. Win some hearts and minds people, and you won't have to save face later by walking your efforts back under heavy mortar fire!</div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Cryptosystems themselves are ineffective against surveillance software in scope the Wassenaar Agreement hence the need for government regulation. </div></div><div><br></div><div><br></div>-- <br><div class="gmail_signature">Regards,<br>Christian Heinrich<br><br><a href="http://cmlh.id.au/contact" target="_blank">http://cmlh.id.au/contact</a></div>
</div></div></div>