Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Microcap & Penny Stocks : JAWS Technologies - NASDAQ (NM):JAWZ -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Mark[ox5] who wrote (60)	4/7/1998 12:11:00 AM
From: justaninvestor	Respond to of 3086

Hi Mark - They designate their product line as L5 and they currently have 40, 56, 128, 1024, 4096 and 16384 bit levels of encryption. Seeing as how they don't have 156 bit leads me to believe that 128 is the current maximum allowed by law. Sorry for the confusion. bbruin

To: Mark[ox5] who wrote (60)	4/7/1998 12:19:00 AM
From: justaninvestor	Respond to of 3086

To All - Another great application will be in the growing field of Smart Card Technology. You can bet that before we become the cashless society, someone is going to have to prove to the masses that if they lose their card or have it stolen, that a 3rd party will not be able to access the electronic cash residing on the card. Let's put our collective heads together and come up with more uses of the Jaws technology! Regards bbruin

To: Mark[ox5] who wrote (60)	4/7/1998 7:09:00 AM
From: Moonglow	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 3086

Mark, You gave an excellent example with your "fastest car in the world" analogy. And quite frankly, upon reflecting about it, I can understand the government's position. After all, who wants another Oklahoma City bombing? It must scare governments to death to think that with really secure encryption that they would not be able to listen in on plans that terrorists might be conceiving. And yet, like the example that bbruin gave.....a multinational bank isn't going to give one whit what the government thinks if they might end up losing millions due to lack of true security. So.....what is the solution? Is there a way to satisfy both parties? I would think that the same genius that is behind the development of this encryption just might be able to think of an answer. My thought might be simplistic, but upon glancing over the Jaws website, I noticed a mention of keys. That without the second Key, their code could not be broken. Well, I wonder if there is any way that an official government representative could be given that second key. In other words, even with the higher encryption levels, could not a way be found to still allow governments to keep track of terrorists while at the same time allowing other innocent parties to have the peace of mind of secure encryption. There has got to be a solution to it somewhere or else why would a company such as Jaws even bother trying to develop their technology? If I were Jaws, I would be making sure that I would be keeping the government agencies well-informed....and perhaps even be working in tandem with them. That's what I would do. Juanita