Hacker News Reader

Comment by yorwba | Hacker News Reader

These three points are not about not getting permission, but about not declaring the services offered. The difference being that permission can be refused, but a declaration is just a one-sided formality.

Other services do require permission, like offering cryptanalysis tools or exporting to non-allied countries.

See this info page by the French government: https://cyber.gouv.fr/controle-relatif-un-moyen-de-cryptolog...

View on HN

So in what way did Telegraph fail to declare the cryptographic services offered?

"Certified declaration" implies an authority that certifies it, i.e. approves it, i.e. has to give permission.

Since the case hasn't yet been adjudicated, I don't know whether or how Telegram failed to provide a certified declaration, but it seems possible that they simply never submitted the form.

"Certified declaration" does not imply any authority giving permission, especially not when the original French is "déclaration conforme." You could call it a "declaration fulfilling the legal requirements" instead if you want.

I find it difficult to imagine that failing to submit a form that does not involve obtaining any kind of approval, would be something you get criminally charged for. To what end would criminal penalties be given for such a benign infraction?

> I find it difficult to imagine that failing to submit a form that does not involve obtaining any kind of approval, would be something you get criminally charged for.

Try not filing the taxes in the US.

> would be something you get criminally charged for.

They clearly just charged him with everything they could think of.

Filing taxes is associated with obligations, that you must meet. Encryption being free to employ would not be accompanied by any such obligations.

There are plenty of WW2/Cold-war era laws on the book regarding cryptography in a lot of countries though.

Even the US.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Export_of_cryptography_from_...

Well then "certified declaration" does imply some restrictions on encryption. You need to employ the encryption in a manner that meets the government requirements.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com