AES

[Brian Gladman]

From: Nicholas Bohm <nbohm@ernest.net>
To: <ukcrypto@maillist.ox.ac.uk>
Cc: <eucrypto@fitug.de>
Sent: 10 August 1999 10:30 AM
Subject: Re: AES


> At 03:33 PM 8/9/1999 -0400, Nigel Hickson wrote:
>
> >Ross and colleague
> >
> >Re AES:  Many congratulations on being one of the chosen ones.  You make
a
> >good point re licences but I would have thought you would still have been
> >exempted on the "research" exclusion.
[snip]

> The definitions include:
>
> "Basic scientific research" (GTN NTN) means experimental or theoretical
> work undertaken principally to acquire new knowledge of the fundamental
> principles of phenomena or observable facts, not primarily directed
towards
> a specific practical aim or objective.

> In the light of this, if it is still up to date, I would have thought
> collaborative work on meeting the requirement for an AES was indeed
> "primarily directed towards a specific practical aim or objective", and so
> fell outside the research exclusion.
>
> If so, Ross's point remains good.

I think it would be very difficult to argue that research designed to
provide the world with a replacement for DES was not directed to a specific
practical objective!   So I think Ross's work, and any similar academic
research, is threatened by these proposed actions on intangibles.

I have been pressing my friends in the European Commission to provide an
update on where all this has got to but, so far, without success.  I did
hear that Germany was pushing hard for these controls to be introduced but I
find this surprising in view of their moves to a more liberal crypto regime.

And we also have the US intent on attacking the Public Domain exception for
cryptography as well so it would be nice to hear that the UK policy will be
to maintain this exception or, better still, to remove all export controls
on civil cryptographic products.

Is this the UK policy position Nigel?

          Brian