Subject: Re: US crypto export resctrictions 'unconstitutional'
To: Andrew Gillham <email@example.com>
From: Bill Studenmund <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 05/07/1999 12:34:40
On 7 May 1999, Perry E. Metzger wrote:
> Andrew Gillham <email@example.com> writes:
> > Perry E. Metzger writes:
> > > 2) Domestic is worthless anyway. Who wants 1DES based Kerb IV anyway?
> > So why is this "broken" implementation still in the tree then?
Because it is useful in certain settings. When I was at Stanford, I used
it all the time, quite effectively.