By: rwessel (robertwessel.delete@this.yahoo.com), February 2, 2013 1:54 am
Room: Moderated Discussions
Doug S (foo.delete@this.bar.bar) on February 1, 2013 4:45 pm wrote:
> Michael S (already5chosen.delete@this.yahoo.com) on January 31, 2013 2:04 pm wrote:
> > Now, there *is* artificial de-featuring in Celeron, but it applies to all cheap Intel
> > CPUs, including not-so-cheap core-i3 - AES-NI is not supported. I suspect that it's
> > a requirement of US government rather than Intel's own marketing decision.
>
>
> Why would the government require Intel to sell CPUs with AES-NI disabled? Are these CPUs sold into
> countries that can't buy any CPUs that have this feature? Not that it would matter, it seems it would
> be pretty easy for rogue countries to set up front companies elsewhere to buy what they need.
The export restrictions on cryptographic stuff, while saner than it used to be, is still full of all sorts of bizarre crap. And is still covered under the arms-trade laws. For the mess, see:
http://www.bis.doc.gov/encryption/default.htm
> Michael S (already5chosen.delete@this.yahoo.com) on January 31, 2013 2:04 pm wrote:
> > Now, there *is* artificial de-featuring in Celeron, but it applies to all cheap Intel
> > CPUs, including not-so-cheap core-i3 - AES-NI is not supported. I suspect that it's
> > a requirement of US government rather than Intel's own marketing decision.
>
>
> Why would the government require Intel to sell CPUs with AES-NI disabled? Are these CPUs sold into
> countries that can't buy any CPUs that have this feature? Not that it would matter, it seems it would
> be pretty easy for rogue countries to set up front companies elsewhere to buy what they need.
The export restrictions on cryptographic stuff, while saner than it used to be, is still full of all sorts of bizarre crap. And is still covered under the arms-trade laws. For the mess, see:
http://www.bis.doc.gov/encryption/default.htm