This effectively exempts things like signature-only smartcards and similar
tokens.
I would not want to risk things on strict technical interpretation.
I would go solely by intent, which often seems obvious.
"I don't know what cryptography is, but I know it when I see it."
/r$
Customers blast Comcast move to foil bandwidth hogs
By Corey Grice
Staff Writer, CNET News.com
August 16, 2000, 12:00 p.m. PT
Revisions made to a Comcast Online customer agreement document
have irked some high-speed cable-modem customers concerned about
a prohibition on the use of secure
At 07:39 AM 8/17/00 +0800, Enzo Michelangeli wrote:
My question was about the legal meaning, or, better, prevalent legal
interpretation, of "signature-only key". ...
This is not a purely academic issue. For example, in Hong Kong the import of
cryptographic devices is exempted from import
Enzo,
My apologies for being unclear. Since I am not an attorney licensed to
practice law in Hong Kong, I of course cannot speak to the legalities of
using a cert/key with a signature-only key usage restriction for encryption
purposes. Though I suspect even an attorney meeting the above
"Tipster" is the name I'm using for the voluntary payment scheme I
posted to the coderpunks and cypherpunks lists (among others) a few
weeks ago under the title "Kill the RIAA: a protocol."
http://www.inet-one.com/cypherpunks/dir.2000.07.24-2000.07.30/msg00387.html
Since that post, I've set
