2 ms·
I don't think we ever reach the question about which element is more important. Elsewhere in the rules situations permitting encryption are spelled out (telemet
by howard941 7y ago
I don't think we ever reach the question about which element is more important. Elsewhere in the rules situations permitting encryption are spelled out (telemetry, RC). None of those exceptions apply to server passwords. Under common rules of construction it's safe to conclude that DH key exchange - of a shared secret, if we're being fair - is prohibited. One that can be worked around but not cleanly. There may not be a clean fix that doesn't involve something distasteful like a key escrow or unachievable like a rules change.
Thank you for a challenging exchange. Those interested can inspect the full reg at https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/47/97.113 https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/47/97.113 . The permitted exceptions aren't hard to search for from there.
- godelski 7y agoI don't think a rules change is unachievable. There's literally talk about it. I would be perfectly okay with a compromise of encrypted signatures or passwords. But I think that is difficult to verify that other things aren't being passed there. So it's probably just easier to allow encryption. I mean Soviet spies probably aren't using HAM bands for secret communications anymore. I also don't understand the argument that encryption makes HAM closed. The internet is pretty open with encryption.