Jim, or however can manipulate the reflector: I think everybody on the mailing list received a copy of my post. Could you remove it now from the reflector?
Thanks Laszlo > -------- Original Message -------- > Subject: RE: Export/Import control > From: "Matt Ball" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: Tue, May 23, 2006 10:37 am > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Hi Lazlo, > > You, of course, realize that there is absolutely no way that we can handle > this confidentially after it is posted to the public IEEE 1619 e-mail > reflector. There are websites who routinely crawl this e-mail list and post > mirrored versions that include advertising. You've also published this > information openly to all the competitors who might care about this > information. But, that being said, I appreciate the information. :) > > -Matt > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, May 23, 2006 8:22 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Export/Import control > > > For Jim's request, I forward the following information I received from > Seagate's export control officer and from a marketing director. Please > handle it confidentially. > > Laszlo > > === > > Most of the local crypto laws are not directly available on the Web. > There are specialized law firms, which can provide the information, > regularly updated. One of them is: > http://rechten.uvt.nl/koops/cryptolaw/ > > > The associated U.S. export control requirements outlined in the U.S. > Export Administration Regulations (EAR) are difficult to summarize, > particularly Sections 740.13, 740.17 and 742.15 which are the principal > references for the export and reexport of encryption items. > > From a U.S. export control perspective, Seagate has secured U.S. > Department of Commerce/Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) commodity > classification rulings covering the following FDE disc drives: > > Encrypting Drive utilizing Enova encrypting chip (Triple DES-128 key > algorithm) > Encrypting Drive utilizing Seagate encrypting chip (AES-128, > 1024/2048-bit RSA algorithm) > Encrypting Drive utilizing integrated Seagate ASIC chip (AES-128, > 1024/2048-bit RSA algorithm) > > BIS has ruled that these Seagate FDE disc drives fall under Export > Control Classification Number (ECCN) heading 5A992 (a) and are > controlled for Anti-Terrorism (AT) reasons. The FDE disc drives are > "mass market" eligible items, and can be exported or re-exported to all > countries without an export license except for those that are subject to > U.S. embargo and AT controls (i.e., currently Cuba, Iran, North Korea, > Libya, Sudan, Syria). > > For a comprehensive understanding of all the associated U.S. encryption > export controls, please refer to the following URL for the U.S. > Department of Commerce/Bureau of Industry and Security website > http://www.bis.doc.gov/encryption/default.htm. > > There are also many other countries that regulate the importation of > encryption items including China, Russia, Israel, France, Hong Kong, > Poland and the Czech Republic. Seagate has substantiated these > constraints with outside counsel; and, Seagate has directly encountered > obstacles with our FDE drive manufacturing intentions for Wuxi, China. > While the China State Encryption Management Bureau (SEMB) is currently > reviewing Seagate's manufacturing permit application, all manufactured > FDE drives will need to be exported, and cannot be sold in China. The > SEMB confirmed Seagate's interpretation of the China Encryption > Regulations that conducting encryption product business in China must > entail use of the China government approved encryption algorithm, local > China manufacture of the chip that includes the algorithm, and > establishing an agent in China to manage the interactions with the > government. > > > -------- Original Message -------- > > Subject: Re: Next P1619/1619.1 Meeting -> Discussion Doc D0.7 > > From: james hughes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Date: Sat, May 20, 2006 1:34 pm > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Cc: james hughes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > I would like some references to the claims in the introduction. My > > reason for asking about such is that it is important that we (IEEE) > > standardize what is right, not what is politically in vogue at a > > moment in history. The I in IEEE is for International. Additionally, > > I am interested in which market? Anyway, references to the claims of > > this paragraph should be provided. > > > > > Access control not just can be provided, but it is required by the > > > export control authorities, > > > > Reference? > > > > > and also by many local authorities, > > > > Reference? > > > > > where storage devices are sold. If the encrypted data is freely > > > accessible, the encryption module can be used as a stand alone, > > > high-speed encryption processor, which is prohibited in many markets. > > > > Reference of the regulation and any example of a storage encryption > > device where the "encryption module can be used as a stand alone, > > high-speed encryption processor" in such a way that it violates a law? > > > > I have looked for information on the web about this kind of > > information. There is a summary done in 1998, but I have found > > nothing online more recent. > > http://www.gilc.org/crypto/crypto-survey.html > > > > > > On May 19, 2006, at 6:16 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > > > Here is an update of the non-removable secure storage discussion > > > document. It does not contain new information, only editorial and > > > formatting changes, in an attempt to make it easier to understand. > > > -Laszlo > > > <Nonremovable Discussions-D07.pdf>
