>You should see your favorite >high-priced export control lawyer for an >official legal opinion. No, just call the NSA ... lawyers opinions don't count. All cryptography is export controlled (from the US). Cryptographic functionality used in a product that provides only integrity and authentication services is usually "easy" to export. Paul -------------------------------------------------------------- Paul Lambert Director of Security Products Oracle Corporation Phone: (415) 506-0370 500 Oracle Parkway, Box 659410 Fax: (415) 413-2963 Redwood Shores, CA 94065 palamber@us.oracle.com --------------------------------------------------------------
-- BEGIN included message
- To: PALAMBER@us.oracle.com
- Subject: Re: Yes, you can export SHA and MD5
- From: "Theodore Y. Ts'o" <ipsec-approval@neptune.tis.com>
- Date: 18 May 96 01:10:03
- Cc: ipsec@tis.com
Date: 17 May 96 15:19:05 -0700 From: "PALAMBER.US.ORACLE.COM" <PALAMBER@us.oracle.com> SHA and MD5 are both export controled, both are "easy" to export. Export should not be a consideration in the comparison of SHA to MD5. Well, to be precise, the NSA has made the claim that SHA and MD5 are export controlled, and the NIST's FIPS documenting SHA claims that SHA is export controlled. There seems to be at least some controversy as to what their statutory and regulatory authorities they are using to make either a statement, at least where SHA and MD5 is being used in a system which does not use any encryption methods or which attempts to engage in data hiding. As far as I know, no one on the IPSEC list is a lawyer, and is actively giving legal advise (myself included). You should see your favorite high-priced export control lawyer for an official legal opinion. My own personal belief is that any algorithm suite which is using as a weak an encryption as single DES might as well use HMAC-MD5. If we were going to use triple-DES for encryption it would perhaps make sense to use HMAC-SHA, or some such. - Ted
-- END included message