Slashdot Mirror


Can the US Stop the Illegal Export of Its Technology?

coondoggie writes "Maybe people are more desperate or maybe there's just too much opportunity to make a quick buck but whatever the excuse, attempts to illegally export technology from the US has gone through the roof. The Department of Justice this week said it has placed criminal charges or convictions against more than 255 defendants in the past two fiscal years — 145 in 2008 and 110 in 2007. That 255 number represents more than a six-fold increase from fiscal year 2005, when the DOJ said about 40 individuals or companies were convicted of over 100 criminal violations of export control laws."

56 of 351 comments (clear)

  1. We don't export the technology. by SupremoMan · · Score: 5, Funny

    We just outsource the means of producing it en masse. Semantics count people!

  2. 11111111 by Chillintau · · Score: 5, Funny

    Good thing there wasn't another attempt, otherwise the counter would've overflowed.

  3. but... by JustNiz · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Isn't it more than a bit arrogant and unrealistic to think the US is the only country with these technologies?
    I mean, I know many Americans like to believe the US invented absolutely everything and are ahead of everyone else technologically, but in fact they really didn't and aren't.

    1. Re:but... by Andr+T. · · Score: 4, Funny

      I had this idea before you posted it. You thief!

      --

      Any life is made up of a single moment, the moment in which a man finds out, once and for all, who he is.

    2. Re:but... by Nefarious+Wheel · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Absolutely not. The laws of physics apply only to Americans.

      --
      Do not mock my vision of impractical footwear
    3. Re:but... by Tablizer · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Isn't it more than a bit arrogant and unrealistic to think the US is the only country with these technologies?

      Maybe not, but remember that our military budget is far larger than any other country's (even if you account for labor rates), meaning that we have the "most toys" because we spend the most on military stuff.
         

    4. Re:but... by eosp · · Score: 2, Funny

      9.81 m/s^2: It's not just a good idea, it's the law.

    5. Re:but... by Austerity+Empowers · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It has nothing to do with arrogance or "IP" in the usual slashdot sense of the word. These export compliance laws have everything to do with countries we are attempting to sanction for whatever reasons.

      For computers of the grade I work on there are some 7-8 countries we are simply not allowed to sell to (mostly middle eastern), not even if it's through a local US based exporter. Considerable effort is made on our part to try to uncover the ultimate destination of your machine(s). I would recommend, for example, never jokingly saying you intend to buy the machine for nuclear weapons. You seriously will be turned down, probably forever, and seriously will be investigated by people not well known for adherence to laws in any country, including the US. That would be obvious to anyone actually intending to do so, of course, but more subtle means are used as well.

      This article is more akin to cuban cigars than pirated Britney Spears CDs. We know they have computers, but we don't want them to profit by our economic system in obtaining them. We can't stop them from manufacturing their own, or from buying from other countries...but by subtracting the US from the picture, like it or not, we can significantly hurt them. It does not matter what nationalities were involved in the design of a machine (often not American, or at least not by birth), it just matters who manufactured it. An Intel CPU should never show up in North Korea, for example.

      The technology/designs itself? I think we know they probably have many important pieces. But knowing how something works is entirely different than being able to build it, and do so on a wide enough scale to be a threat. That's mostly what the intent is.

    6. Re:but... by PachmanP · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I would really really love to know how the world would be today if the US (and hopefully all the others) put all their defense/war budgets into humanitarian/environmental projects instead. I wonder if it really would be a utopia or if it would have fallen into chaos without the threat of such vast arms.

      We'd be speaking Russian? Or German? Or maybe Chinese? Although maybe if you were blond and fair skinned it would be a utopia. Or maybe without the threat of the capitalists the communist utopia would have been achieved. That said I'm of the opinion that if someone doesn't have a really big stick all the people with medium sticks would spend ALL of their time trying to beat the sh*t out of the people with slightly smaller sticks... At least until the guys with the rocks started teaming up...

      --
      You're thinking small. Why miniaturize the laser, when we could instead enlarge the sharks? -John Searle
    7. Re:but... by Fluffeh · · Score: 2, Interesting

      What I meant to ask really is I would love to know what the world would be like if everyone decided to do away with their sticks.

      Would a lack of big sticks effectively breed out the smaller sticks? Would there be a need for someone to go make a medium stick if there wasn't anyone with a bigger stick to start with?

      To make a less vague example: If the US spent the money it has on the War in Iraq/Afghanistan on humanitarian efforts in those exact same countries would there still be such a level of insurgency and resentment or would the common people whose lives would have been vastly improved weeded out the problems themselves? I mean, why are those people turning to extremism? If I didn't have water to drink, food to eat, a hospital for when I was sick I could easily be turned to go "fight the enemy". If I had those things given to me (or access to them in the first place) I can't imagine myself able to be stirred up to that level of rage at all. I sometimes think different to others, but rather than focusing so much on putting out the fire, why can't people spent more focus on finding out why the fire started in the first place?

      --
      Moved to http://soylentnews.org/. You are invited to join us too!
  4. 255 defendants by DancesWithBlowTorch · · Score: 5, Funny

    The Department of Justice this week said it has placed criminal charges or convictions against more than 255 defendants in the past two fiscal years

    The true number is actually much higher, but with all the technology going overseas, the feds have to do with 8bit registers.

    Badabumm - disssssh. Thanks! I'll be here all week. Try the lamb.

  5. And the Answer Is by PingPongBoy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Yes.

    Of course, by legalizing it.

    --
    Know your pads. One time pad: good for cryptography. Two timing pad: where to take your mistress.
    1. Re:And the Answer Is by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I for one would prefer advanced fighter jet technology (i.e. F-22) to stay IN the united states and out of China, Russia, Israel, Iran...etc.

    2. Re:And the Answer Is by s_p_oneil · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I'm going to have to go with AC there. They're not just talking about software. They're talking about physical pieces of military hardware being stolen. And in the case of software, it's military software to run that hardware. If you think it would help to make stealing legal, I wouldn't mind visiting your house to see what you've got that's worth taking. ;-)

    3. Re:And the Answer Is by VisceralLogic · · Score: 2, Informative

      Eperience and expertise are a huge player here. You can read all the books you want, but it doesn't mean you'll be able to actually design a better aircraft.

      --
      Stop! Dremel time!
  6. Shocking by kipin · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Keep adding additional rules, regulations and laws and people tend to start breaking more laws since more of them exist to break.

    --
    If I can not smoke in heaven, then I shall not go. -- Mark Twain
  7. How many of those exports by overshoot · · Score: 5, Interesting

    were commodities readily available elsewhere but restricted, like standard cryptographic algorithms, from export from the USA -- even if they were originally imported?

    --
    Lacking <sarcasm> tags, /. substitutes moderation as "Troll."
    1. Re:How many of those exports by Watson+Ladd · · Score: 3, Informative

      Since Bernstein sued crypto can be exported without restriction.

      --
      Inventions have long since reached their limit, and I see no hope for further development.-- Frontinus, 1st cent. AD
    2. Re:How many of those exports by scrod98 · · Score: 5, Informative

      Not true - US Bureau of Industry and Security still requires that encryption software export is controlled (15CFR774). We have applied for and received several license exemptions, but still must report our exports of our software that includes blowfish twice per year, to the actual addresses each shipment is sent.

      --
      LETS DECOMPOSE & ENJOY ASSEMBLING
  8. Is it for real? by spaceyhackerlady · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Is this spike for real, or is it the result of increased enforcement efforts?

    ...laura

  9. Re:Excuse? by philspear · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Yeah, and cows don't WANT to be eaten, but they taste good with barbecue sauce...

    Similarly, information might "want" to be free, but giving other countries our technology is a stupid move, so it's not going to.

    And what the fuck does "Information wants to be free" even mean or justify anyway?

  10. 0xFFFF by Forty+Two+Tenfold · · Score: 5, Funny

    Good thing there wasn't another attempt, otherwise the counter would've overflowed.

    WORD.

    --
    Upward mobility is a slippery slope - the higher you climb the more you show your ass.
    1. Re:0xFFFF by davidwr · · Score: 2, Funny

      Final Jeopardy answer:

      WORD.

      Final Jeopardy question: What do they need a longer one of?

      --
      Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
  11. Re:Excuse? by bluefoxlucid · · Score: 3, Funny

    Just ignore him, he's a hippie.

  12. Exporting DRM by cpghost · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Where, oh where is the DoC and DoJ when it comes to forbidding the export of this abomination called DRM?

    --
    cpghost at Cordula's Web.
  13. What about the net import in technical expertise ? by giorgist · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The cost of educating a person is very high.
    What of the net import in technical expertise ?
    Often some of the very best students go to US, and end up staying and doing high end re-search.
    The US didn't have to pay to feed and bring up this person. If this person is 1 in 100,
    the US didn't have to pay and feed and educate 100 people and selectively keep only the best one without having to bother
    with the rest.

    I would say that the US is getting the good end of the deal

    G

  14. Is there an increase? by maglor_83 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The Department of Justice this week said it has placed criminal charges or convictions against more than 255 defendants in the past two fiscal years â" 145 in 2008 and 110 in 2007. That 255 number represents more than a six-fold increase from fiscal year 2005, when the DOJ said about 40 individuals or companies were convicted of over 100 criminal violations of export control laws

    So how many were charged and then aquitted in 2005?

  15. Re:Excuse? by e9th · · Score: 3, Informative

    Don't confuse information with technology. Most of the prosecutions were for exporting goods, not IP.

  16. Laptops and cameras, too by Geoffrey.landis · · Score: 3, Informative
    Note that while the headlines make it seem like they're talking about nuclear weapons technologies and high tech, the majority of these are probably violations of the ITAR laws that have little or nothing to do with weapons-- the law is so broadly written that almost anything could be "arms". Export a laptop and you're violating ITAR.

    ... and then, if you scroll down a little in the referenced article, this line is interesting: "Mexico seems to be the hotspot for illegal exports of firearms, including assault weapons and rifles, as well as large quantities of ammunition, the DOJ stated." So, apparently bullets are part of this "illegal export of [US] technology"

    --
    http://www.geoffreylandis.com
  17. We don't create the technology. by gnutoo · · Score: 2, Insightful

    We import bright people from around the world to do it for us. At least we used to. Many of them have gone back home to compete on fair terms. Others work at research centers funded by US multinationals like GE, Microsoft and IBM. Why the US seeks to restrict what foreign people make in foreign countries is as much a mystery as the IP Empire that claims ownership to the fundamental ideas involved. Less and less of this stuff is home grown and made.

  18. it works both ways by BigBadBus · · Score: 3, Informative

    I used to work for Bae Systems in Farnborough and the management there would constantly bemoan the fact that the US couldn't/wouldn't share any technological advances with us for x number of years. We, of course, were expected to share with them, lest we sacrifice our special agreements and co-operations.

  19. Terminator technology IS a US tech by cpghost · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I mean, I know many Americans like to believe the US invented absolutely everything and are ahead of everyone else technologically, but in fact they really didn't and aren't.

    But this is surely a US invented technology... and IMHO nothing to be proud of, as it already caused famines in Africa and, worst of all, was actually designed to lead to just that consequence.

    Maybe a few export bans of some US technology like this one wouldn't be so wrong, after all?

    --
    cpghost at Cordula's Web.
    1. Re:Terminator technology IS a US tech by MightyYar · · Score: 3, Interesting

      as it already caused famines in Africa

      First of all, I don't think it's ever been used commercially - much less "caused a famine".

      Second of all, how is it different from selling standard hybrid seeds, where most of the offspring is junk anyway?

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
    2. Re:Terminator technology IS a US tech by Geoffrey.landis · · Score: 2, Interesting

      But this is surely a US invented technology... and IMHO nothing to be proud of, as it already caused famines in Africa...

      According to the link you gave, "The technology was under development by the U.S. Department of Agriculture and Delta and Pine Land company in the 1990s and is not yet commercially available. "

      If it's never been used, how could it already have caused famines?

      --
      http://www.geoffreylandis.com
    3. Re:Terminator technology IS a US tech by Ihmhi · · Score: 2, Funny

      Ever see Lord of War? If a Terminator was ever set loose in Africa, as soon as someone found out he was made of scrappable metal he would have been stripped bare.

  20. Re:Excuse? by gclef · · Score: 4, Funny

    ...and yet, information hates to be anthromorphized. It's funny that way.

  21. Most of thist stuff has commercial uses by Animats · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Most of the stuff the US is still export-controlling either has commercial uses or non-US sources. If you look at the indictments, the big one was about someone exporting carbon fibre materials to the China Space Agency. Why is the US trying to stop that? There's some noise about how carbon fibre might be somehow used to enrich uranium. China already has its own enrichment plants, nuclear weapons, and nuclear reactors. They don't need a centrifuge enrichment plant, except maybe for cost reduction. The US tries, for some reason, to slow down China's space program by refusing to export certain space-related items. Not that it makes much difference; the Chinese space program seems to be doing just fine.

    It's hard to think of anything in computing that you can't get outside the US. Nor is there any military computing application that really requires more compute power that you couldn't put together from stuff you could mail order from Taiwan or China.

    Arms control and technology export control are different issues. Arms control is intended to make it harder for people we don't like to get firepower in bulk. It's not about the underlying technology; it's about production. Most of the cases mentioned are pure arms control issues.

  22. Sure by SleepyHappyDoc · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Just as soon as they stop all the cocaine from coming in.

    --
    Stasis is death. Embrace change.
  23. Stop giving the traitors presidential pardons by quenda · · Score: 5, Insightful
    That might help.

    Which was the last US government that didn't illegally export arms?

  24. anything truly valuable by circletimessquare · · Score: 2, Insightful

    such as aluminum cylinders for refining uranium hexafluoride, or computer chips hardened against cosmic rays for ICBMs, are thing you don't pick up at newegg and reship to iran. simple as that

    if it is something the average american joe can buy, it is something the average iranian jamal can buy. nothing to be done about it except accept. nonissue, nonstory

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
    1. Re:anything truly valuable by PPH · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The problems start if you are a US company, building something for the average Joe and the Pentagon would like to buy one. Like some sort of advanced GPU for high performance gaming that could also be used for processing radar images or SIGINT and cryptanalysis. Suddenly, your chip becomes restricted under the jurisdiction of ITAR. So, if you are smart, you incorporate offshore and have your chips made at foreign founderies. You have your R&D subcontracted to firms in India or Russia. Then you can ship your stuff around the world freely. If the DoD wants some for one of its projects, you direct them to these foreign sources.

      If you are feeling real nasty, you can set your government sales office up in Tehran, Havana, or Pyongyang. Or France.

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
  25. Huh? by gweihir · · Score: 2, Insightful

    There is technology in the US not available elsewhere? News to me. In fact most interesting stuff is imported into the US today....

    --
    Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
  26. Re:Excuse? by init100 · · Score: 4, Informative

    That appeared to be talking about the physical costs to getting information out.

    I see the Information wants to be free as an observation that information spreads easily, and that once something is out, you can't lock it up again, just like you can't put a genie back into a bottle.

    A good example of this is the Streisand Effect, in which some entity tries to force the removal of some piece of information from the internet, but since the attempt makes people perceive the information as valuable, large numbers make sure that they get a copy themselves. Poster cases for this effect is the attempt by certain movie companies to remove a HD-DVD encryption key from the internet. The attempt seriously backfired, making the encryption key one of the most well-known large numbers on the internet.

  27. I am European working for a US comany in Canada by quax · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Recently I was forced to sit through an online training with regards to US export controls. The regulations are insane. I came away wondering why any high tech company would want to incorporate in the US with these kind of laws on the book. For instance you could be in violation if you show foreign visitors around your company and they get a fleeting look at a white-board that discusses a strong encryption algorithm. Same thing if you discuss such a "sensitive" technology on the phone with a foreigner. Absolutely and totally nuts.

    1. Re:I am European working for a US comany in Canada by blackcoot · · Score: 4, Interesting

      as someone on the other side (us citizen working on ITAR restricted technologies / programs that _require_ collaborating with foreign nationals), i can vouch for just how massive a pain-in-the-ass ITAR is:

      i can't talk to foreign national colleagues about anything other than the weather.
      i can't deal with foreign vendors.
      i can't buy parts from foreign companies unless we have import licenses on file.
      i can't get support without first having to filter all questions through a company export officer.
      i can't ship equipment for repair if it has to leave the us (novatel, i'm looking at *you*)
      i can't share interface definitions or software process documents without an export license.

      really, the restrictions verge on the absurd, especially when you consider that the papers describing most of the interesting technologies that i work on are published in international journals and freely available, often themselves as a result of gov't funded research.

    2. Re:I am European working for a US comany in Canada by walterbyrd · · Score: 2, Insightful

      For instance you could be in violation if you show foreign visitors around your company and they get a fleeting look at a white-board that discusses a strong encryption algorithm.

      Maybe that's just a bad example, but I don't see that as "nuts" at all. If you were writing the requlations, how would you put it? "Foreign visitors can look at sensitive claissified data, but only for n seconds, and only if . . . ?" Isn't it much easier, and more sensible, to say "foreign visitors can not look at such data?"

  28. You can't stop this problem by EmbeddedJanitor · · Score: 4, Insightful
    This is as old as the hills. When I lived in apartheid South Africa in the 1980s the sanctions made it illegal to export various chips to South Africa. They still got there disguised as legal electronic components. The middle men made a killing. Limiting availability might have made USA etc voters happy, but all that really happened was that the South African military industry got a shot in the arm, building its own stuff and selling it to other willing customers. Same deal for the South African nuclear program.

    Nothing much has changed. Smaller stuff like special electronics can be easily hidden inside perfectly legal consumer electronic devices and the $8/hr TSA guy working at the airport will never know the difference. Unless you completely seal borders (??how??) and cut off all tourism etc, you're just doing it for show.

    --
    Engineering is the art of compromise.
  29. Bizarre Math by Bob9113 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The Department of Justice this week said it has placed criminal charges or convictions against more than 255 defendants in the past two fiscal years -- 145 in 2008 and 110 in 2007. That 255 number represents more than a six-fold increase from fiscal year 2005, when the DOJ said about 40 individuals or companies were convicted of over 100 criminal violations of export control laws.

    Apparently they went to the "baffle them with bullshit" school of math - if the above is an accurate depiction.

    In 2005, 40 individuals were convicted.
    In 2007 and 2008 combined, 255 were indicted.

    In 2005, enforcement effort was ???
    In 2005, indictment count was ???
    In 2007 and 2008 combined, conviction count was ???
    In 2007 and 2008, enforcement effort was ???

    From the above, we can conclude: very little. The only thing we can say for sure about those numbers is that "six-fold increase" is bullshit. If every single one of those 255 individuals indicted is convicted on at least one count (extremely unlikely), the annual rate is only 127.5, which is only 3x. Even that would only speak of conviction rates, not attempt rates. Enforcement has almost certainly increased given the general increase in federal participation in intellectual property and trade secret law.

    I'm not saying it has not grown, nor whether it should be a greater or lesser focus at the federal level. But the above statement, if accurately portrayed, is disingenuous at best, and deceitful at worst.

    The first step in having a serious discourse about federal policy is to present the issue honestly.

  30. Re:Trade secrets != copyrights or patents by The+Ultimate+Fartkno · · Score: 2, Funny

    I agree completely, and I understand the difference. I probably fell for a troll and should never have posted either way, but every time I hear "information wants to be free" used to justify something like industrial espionage or theft of state secrets I tend to just black out. I wake up two minutes later, hopefully under the desk and not in front of a completed post.

  31. Re:Excuse? by Seven_Six_Two · · Score: 2

    So is incessant war mongering a trait you look for when you enter the voting booth? How is developing weapons and using them on others an indicator of enlightenment? If all information was free and open, then maybe some countries would spend more time brokering peace and improving the world instead of making sure that they are able to crush their enemies first. I don't understand blind nationalism. I love where I live, but if the politicians here get much worse, I'm either leaving the country or revolting. We're all the same after all, despite our great number of differences.

  32. Re:Excuse? by HungryHobo · · Score: 4, Informative

    Hmm.... I dunno.
    If I was currently selling illegal drugs in the US and wanted to continue to rake in giant piles of money I'd be making political donations to whoever was pushing the "tough on drugs" laws with a little note along the lines of "keep up the good work mate".
    Why? Well if it was legalised I'd be ruined!

    Who was hurt most by the ending of prohibition? The mob of course, they wanted it to never end.
    Legal distributors selling safer cheaper drugs would push them out of the market entirely.

    The best thing that can happen for them is for a competitor to be busted, they can just expand into their former market overnight. Sure they might be busted themselves but the organisations which survive and grow will be the ones which are best at avoiding getting caught.

    I've heard that during prohibition foreign alcohol producers quietly lobbied to keep prohibition since consumption didn't go down, the American producers were pushed out of business and import taxes went the way of the morning mist.

    Few people seem to be able to graps this, drug laws just create a situation where there's a group of people distributing drugs with a large financial incentive to expand their market.

    Want to get rid of the drug dealers? It only takes a few easy and cheap steps.
    Step 1: Provide free high quality drugs to people already addicted with no criminal penalties or consequences to people who come forward and ask for them.
    Step 2: You're basicly done, you've knocked the bottom out of the drug buisness, you are now the distributor and you have no reason to try to get more people addicted. Drug dealers can no longer make any profit out of getting kids addicted since they just go to you when it starts costing money.

    Much much much much cheaper than the massive failure that the war on drugs is.

  33. Re:Excuse? by HungryHobo · · Score: 2, Informative

    Thing is the know how isn't the big deal. Any decent group of physics PHDs and professors could build a bomb with the right materials. The only thing really stopping every tom dick and harry from building one is the uranium enrichment. That takes serious money and time to get working.

  34. Re:Excuse? by Blue+Warlord · · Score: 4, Informative

    Ahum that had much more todo with the historical context in which these numbers come from. You know the seventies with the hippies. It is a well established fact that drugs usage in the Netherlands is considerable lower than the European average or the USA for that matter. See http://www.drugwarfacts.org/thenethe.htm for some hard numbers.

  35. Re:Excuse? by TheP4st · · Score: 3, Funny

    but giving other countries our technology is a stupid move,

    Technology like the Playstation with a label underneath saying that it was illegal to export it from the US, which I bought in Hong Kong back in the 90's and brought to the terrorist nation Sweden?

    --
    "I have downloaded hundreds and hundreds of records, why would I care if somebody downloads ours?" Robin Pecknold
  36. Re:Excuse? by plague3106 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Huh? Whoever said the goal was to get people to stop using drugs? The goal is to end the violence, save the huge taxpayer cost, and stop the other dangers (such as cutting coke with rat poison), not to get people to stop.

  37. Our biggest export blunder at the time was... by Almost-Retired · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Allowing Hitachi America to get away with exporting a multiaxis milling machine complete with the software to drive it. Up till then, the screws on russian subs were so noisy, and each sub had their own unique noise signature that our hydrophone listening devices scattered about the ocean could identify what sub was backing out of the docks on the russian north coast by the time it had moved 100 yards. This was in the height of the cold war. Our subs OTOH could move at classified speeds underwater so quietly that if their sonars didn't catch the ping, they never knew we were within miles, let alone the few yards away that we actually were. In one instance, we caught one of theirs off the Carolina coast, and he found he was 'made' so he went to the bottom to wait us out. But we had air recyclers they didn't. When he tried to blow the tanks and surface for air, he found our sub sitting on him. I don't think he heard it when the hulls made contact & we kept silent. Held him down for another bit of time just to make the point, then beat him to the surface. That sub captain probably went home to a firing squad because he allowed that to happen.

    Within a year or two of that machines exportation by Hitachi America, the russian subs suddenly started getting as quiet as ours. So our hydrophones became worthless as we couldn't hear them anymore. But by then, the cold war was winding down. And that was just one of the reasons we won that war.

    Hitachi? Got a slap on the wrist, where the actual act should have been treason charges & a trip to ACE Hardware for some new rope.

    That seemed to take the heart out of any reason to keep Phil Zimmerman jailed, so he was released after a while, I suspect with instructions to add a back door to PGP, which is the reason I personally have never used a newer than 2.6.2 release. And haven't used that in years as I no longer care what my government thinks of me since its so plain they think I'm just another of the sheeple. All they have to do is wait for me to fall over (74 and diabetic now) and they won't be out a dime.

    It all boils down to its not being who you know, its who you blow. Very abundantly proven by the facts. Sigh...

    --
    Cheers, Gene