> Using strong crypto in a commercial product, especially one intended for international distribution, still brings up a bunch of legal issues that they may hav

> Using strong crypto in a commercial product, especially one intended for international distribution, still brings up a bunch of legal issues that they may have been trying to sidestep: But apparently they sell VPN software. That's their product. The obscured by not encrypted output is the information from the inside of the VPN, and more. They could not avoid solving legal issues anyway when selling VPN. They completely deserve a "doghouse" tag on Schneier's blog: "A decade ago, the Doghouse was a regular feature in both my email newsletter Crypto-Gram and my blog. In it, I would call out particularly egregious -- and amusing -- examples of cryptographic "snake oil." I dropped it both because it stopped being fun and because almost everyone converged on standard cryptographic libraries, which meant standard non-snake-oil cryptography. But every so often, a new company comes along that is so ridiculous, so nonsensical, so bizarre, that there is nothing to do but call it out." FortiGuard qualified IMHO. A big seller of VPN software to companies (2B revenue!) who is deliberately faking encryption.