[6459] in cryptography@c2.net mail archive
Re: New Encryption Regulations have other gotchas
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Peter Gutmann)
Sat Jan 22 19:43:35 2000
From: pgut001@cs.auckland.ac.nz (Peter Gutmann)
To: cryptography@c2.net
Reply-To: pgut001@cs.auckland.ac.nz
X-Charge-To: pgut001
Date: Sun, 23 Jan 2000 10:49:57 (NZDT)
Message-ID: <94857779718518@cs26.cs.auckland.ac.nz>
John Young <jya@pipeline.com> writes:
>Phil Karn wrote:
>
>>I believe the anti-Tempest provisions have been in the export regs
>>for some time.
>
>Yes, but when did they appear? We're attempting to trace Tempest's origin --
>not easy because of classification of so much stuff. One classified standard
>dates to 1967.
I was reading an early-80's paper on OS security and it mentioned some work
from the 1950's on this. I've heard comments about knowledge of Tempest issues
during this time from various people, but this is the earliest reference I've
found in a published article. If I can re-locate the source I'll post a
reference to it.
Peter.
