3 ms·

I'm equally curious what this means for Signal and any other open-source encrypted services. In the US, ITAR could hypothetically be used to make open-sourcing

I'm equally curious what this means for Signal and any other open-source encrypted services. In the US, ITAR could hypothetically be used to make open-sourcing of cryptographic algorithms illegal. This technique is used for robotics software that could be dual-purposed for weapons guidance.

deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
wbl 7y ago
The EAR does not cover publically availible source code but specifically exempts it.
- smudgymcscmudge 7y ago
  Is "EAR" the agreement? It sounds like you know about it. Can you share information with us?
mark_l_watson 7y ago
Proteus, I am concerned too. Sometimes fiction reflects reality better than we might like, I am thinking of William Gibson’s cyber punk future distopean sci-fi. That said, freedom can also be in our own minds, creating a good life in an ocean of political corruption and increasing control of corporations/elites. It would take more effort, but I think I could also have a good life in Gibson’s sci-fi worlds.
colejohnson66 7y ago
> In the US, ITAR could hypothetically be used to make open-sourcing of cryptographic algorithms illegal. Wikipedia has some good info re: export of cryptography[0]. In addition, two circuits (Ninth[1] and Sixth[2]) have ruled that source code is protected by the First Amendment. [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Export_of_cryptography_from_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Export_of_cryptography_from_th... [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernstein_v._United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernstein_v._United_States [2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Junger_v._Daley https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Junger_v._Daley
- i_am_proteus 7y ago
  This case law only applies as long as the algorithm is not classified. As soon as any Original Classification Authority classifies the algorithm, it falls under a new category on the U.S. Munitions List and the government could then restrict its distribution. Obviously, classifying something that has already been open source just makes it more difficult to use and numerous local copies will be retained, but it does make further distribution illegal. This is the only mechanism I can think of by which the US government could kill Signal in its existing open-source form. It's ugly, but not unthinkable.
  - floatboth 7y ago
    Signal doesn't have to be distributed from the US though (well, apk for sideloading at least, app stores are US based..) OpenBSD in the 90s used to emphasize that they're from Canada and have strong crypto because of that.

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

wbl 7y ago

The EAR does not cover publically availible source code but specifically exempts it.

smudgymcscmudge 7y ago
Is "EAR" the agreement? It sounds like you know about it. Can you share information with us?

mark_l_watson 7y ago

Proteus, I am concerned too. Sometimes fiction reflects reality better than we might like, I am thinking of William Gibson’s cyber punk future distopean sci-fi. That said, freedom can also be in our own minds, creating a good life in an ocean of political corruption and increasing control of corporations/elites. It would take more effort, but I think I could also have a good life in Gibson’s sci-fi worlds.

colejohnson66 7y ago

> In the US, ITAR could hypothetically be used to make open-sourcing of cryptographic algorithms illegal. Wikipedia has some good info re: export of cryptography[0]. In addition, two circuits (Ninth[1] and Sixth[2]) have ruled that source code is protected by the First Amendment. [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Export_of_cryptography_from_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Export_of_cryptography_from_th... [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernstein_v._United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernstein_v._United_States [2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Junger_v._Daley https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Junger_v._Daley

i_am_proteus 7y ago
This case law only applies as long as the algorithm is not classified. As soon as any Original Classification Authority classifies the algorithm, it falls under a new category on the U.S. Munitions List and the government could then restrict its distribution. Obviously, classifying something that has already been open source just makes it more difficult to use and numerous local copies will be retained, but it does make further distribution illegal. This is the only mechanism I can think of by which the US government could kill Signal in its existing open-source form. It's ugly, but not unthinkable.
- floatboth 7y ago
  Signal doesn't have to be distributed from the US though (well, apk for sideloading at least, app stores are US based..) OpenBSD in the 90s used to emphasize that they're from Canada and have strong crypto because of that.