EEVblog Electronics Community Forum
Products => Thermal Imaging => Topic started by: Fraser on November 21, 2017, 03:40:54 pm
-
I thought I would start this thread to highlight the challenges that we face when discussing thermal imaging technology on a public forum with a membership that is spread across our planet.
Why the need for such a post ?
I was recently trying to assist a fellow forum member with a modification to his thermal camera. The camera in question was a 320 x 240 pixel high frame rate model that uses a BST sensor. Such technology used to be found at the business end of a heat seeking weapons system.
I was warned by a very good friend that I needed to tread carefully. He has my best interests at heart and I thank him for the advice. The problem was, I am in the UK and the chap I was trying to help is in a country that is subject to a wide ranging embargo issued by the UK government. The embargo includes providing technical support for certain controlled technologies.
Whilst my assistance to date was not in any way in depth circuit level information, I could have strayed into dangerous territory oblivious to how such might be considered and viewed as 'too much' by the powers that be :( Technical support is a very loose term and open to interpretation.
OK, to the topic of this thread......
Whether we like it or not, thermal imaging technology remains controlled in terms of who may have access to different levels of capability. There have been many discussions about whether this is right, fair or effective, but be that as it may, there are regulations in place that are enforced by a large number of countries, for the greater good. No one wants to make it easy for 'bad people' to get their hands on highly capable technology that reduces the technology gap between the sides of right and wrong. This will always be a controversial topic though, and I understand that. Thermal imaging technology has never been so cheap or available as it is today. That availability sadly leads to people expecting more capability and availability of better cameras. Such may be incompatible with extant regulations that cover such technology.
So what are these regulations and how are they applied ?
You will often hear the terms ITAR (International Traffic in Arms Regulations) that comes from the US DoD and BIS policy makers. Basically ITAR lays down rules regarding what can, and cannot, be shipped outside of US borders without an export licence. If an Export licence is required, various paperwork must be submitted, checked and approved before a licence may be issued. This is intended to prevent the wrong people getting their hands on equipment and technology that the USA have issues with, such as enemies of the state.
What some may be unaware of is that ITAR can apply to a whole equipment/machine, or just a single component within it, such as a microprocessor, encryption ASIC or, in our case, a thermal imaging sensor.
So when someone states that ITAR does not apply to an equipment manufactured outside of the USA, it is not always true. If a component part of that equipment was exported from the USA under export licence due to ITAR, that part remains an ITAR controlled product even when integrated into a machine or system. Common sense really. This is why you will find NEC AVIO thermal cameras that were made in Japan labelled with warnings about it being subject to export controls. In some cases the microbolometer is a USA sourced Boeing product of military weapons grade. Hence it would have been exported to Japan under an ITAR export licence.
Now whilst the USA has ITAR regulations, the rest of the World has the Wassenaar arrangement This is an official agreement between many countries regarding the export of certain equipment and technologies that are deemed 'Dual Use' or of military potential. That is to say, an item that may be used for both civilian and military applications that could present an aid to the perceived 'enemy'. Separate Dual Use technology regulations also exist in parallel to the Wassenaar arrangement.
The Wassenaar Arrangement ties in closely with the US ITAR regulations and assures the US DoD and BIS that their controls under ITAR will be extended to members of the Wassenaar arrangement. So the agreement may not be ITAR, but it does respect and support the objectives of ITAR.
If you build a capable thermal imaging camera and the country in which it is built has signed the Wassenaar arrangement, the sale and export of that camera will be subject to controls to avoid it falling into the wrong hands. This applies even if there are no USA sourced parts within the camera. The difference is that no application for an export licence is submitted to the US BIS for approval. Such occurs within the manufacturers own country, so the USA is not involved. This is applicable where French ULIS Microbolometers are used in a design. There are sometimes still export controls, just not US export controls.
So what exactly is covered by ITAR and the Wassenaar Arrangement ?
It is best to google this and check for yourself as it is a wide ranging and complex topic !
What I do need to highlight though is that it is not just the physical device or equipment that comes under the controls of these regulations.
Knowledge can be power and technical knowledge can enable otherwise stalled or slow R&D.
For this reason it is not only the physical item that is controlled, but also the detailed technical specification (military equipment) and any technical information that may aid enablement or development of such an item by those deemed inappropriate to own such. In our case, this would include deep technical detail of how a microbolometer may be constructed, integrated into a host system, schematics and even interconnection wiring information. Details of data protocols are also protected where appropriate.
So basically, if I were to provide significant detail of how to integrate a microbolometer into a capable thermal camera design, the schematics for such, or just the pinout of commercial high capability thermal cameras, I would risk a visit from the UK's Special Branch to discus my actions and potential prosecution under the relevant regulations and laws. Not something I would wish to happen. This is another reason why you will not normally find schematics for high resolution, high frame rate thermal cameras on the internet. Even camera service agent Service Manuals tend to contain only test point data and board replacement guidance, no schematics that could leak into the public domain.
Thankfully the UK is not a Police State and our Police are not known for being petty. To gain their attention you would need to release enough sensitive data to reasonably enable an undesirable recipient to significantly advance their R&D or integrate a capable core, obtained illicitly, into a system. Even so, today's events are making me think carefully about how deep I will go into thermal camera designs and associated deep technical detail. Such is a bit of a minefield. Showing teardowns is not a big deal, but releasing reverse engineered schematic detail would be.
There are plenty of books on the topic of thermal imaging and the technology used. I have many and they can be very interesting reading. They tread a careful path though. Just enough detail to explain how a thermal imaging system works and why it behaves as it does, without providing detail that may be of use to undesirables.
Before anyone says this level of control is daft, remember ISIS were desperate to re-enable time expired missile systems that used M-SALT high current short duration battery packs. They actively sought information on making a replacement battery to enable the missiles use. Knowledge IS power and it should be disseminated responsibly.
I am happy to discuss this matter further, just remember, I did not create the policies, I do have to comply with them however.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Traffic_in_Arms_Regulations
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dual-use_technology
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wassenaar_Arrangement
Fraser
-
ITAR embargoed and sanctioned countries
http://www.export.pitt.edu/embargoed-and-sanctioned-countries (http://www.export.pitt.edu/embargoed-and-sanctioned-countries)
Fraser
-
Wassenaar FAQ
https://blog.rapid7.com/2015/06/12/wassenaar-arrangement-frequently-asked-questions/
Fraser
-
Current UK Arms embargoes (includes Dual Use Technology)
I have to adhear to these.
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/current-arms-embargoes-and-other-restrictions (https://www.gov.uk/guidance/current-arms-embargoes-and-other-restrictions)
Fraser
-
EU Dual Use Technology export controls
http://ec.europa.eu/trade/import-and-export-rules/export-from-eu/dual-use-controls/index_en.htm (http://ec.europa.eu/trade/import-and-export-rules/export-from-eu/dual-use-controls/index_en.htm)
Fraser
-
WorldECR magazine, an interesting read
https://www.worldecr.com/wp-content/uploads/WorldECR%20Issue%2026.pdf (https://www.worldecr.com/wp-content/uploads/WorldECR%20Issue%2026.pdf)
Fraser
-
Umm yeah YOU CAN get in trouble helping terrorist or countries embargoed to develop thermal targeting systems for military applications...
I would suggest not to discuss such applications of thermal detection systems here or any where in internet.
-
Are these restrictions on thermal imaging technology even still relevant these days where there is already such wide availability ? I know nothing about military weapons really but with things like deep learning networks available to anyone wouldn't it be simple for someone just to train a network for accurate optical (at least in daylight) and auditory/radar recognition of a target and build them into self guided weapons ?. Why is thermal imagery any more important than optical or auditory/radar guidance non of which have any restrictions? or are there other uses for thermal imaging (other than night imaging ) that make it more valuable as a military weapon ?
Regards
-
Are these restrictions on thermal imaging technology even still relevant these days where there is already such wide availability ? I know nothing about military weapons really but with things like deep learning networks available to anyone wouldn't it be simple for someone just to train a network for accurate optical (at least in daylight) and auditory/radar recognition of a target and build them into self guided weapons ?. Why is thermal imagery any more important than optical or auditory/radar guidance non of which have any restrictions? or are there other uses for thermal imaging (other than night imaging ) that make it more valuable as a military weapon ?
Regards
Sharing providing or helping to develop military grade technology with any country embargoed sanctioned or considered potential enemy of country of your origin is asking for trouble anyone with common sense should understand the concept.
-
Just a little further clarification on ITAR. In any export from the US that is subject to ITAR a license is issued which identifies specifically the technology elements which are permitted for export and the allowed use of those technologies. The license is a binding legal document on both the exporter and the recipient. This is how ITAR rules propagate to countries other than the US.
I would advise anyone planning to dip their toes in these waters to get advice from a real expert. I am not such even though during my employment I had many, many hours of training on ITAR. There are myriad nooks and crannies in this subject. Also, as you might expect, the regulations are not really clear about what is being protected. There is no desire to create a roadmap telling the bad guys where to look for comparable capabilities or methods to defeat specific capabilities.
The biggest problem, as Fraser says, is that the rules apply to everyone. You don't have to have worked for the government or a defense contractor. And ignorance is never a defense.
There is value in protecting this knowledge. If the knowledge had no value people here on this forum would not be asking for help, looking for ways to implement and improve operations and so on. No deep learning network can replace the efforts of the teams of really bright people that have worked to develop advantages for their nations.
-
Why is thermal imagery any more important than optical or auditory/radar guidance non of which have any restrictions?
Interesting. When were the restrictions on optical and radar guidance removed? :)
-
When I started my PhD dissertation project, which is a 10kV, 200A, 50ns switching power module, I knew it is ITAR controlled. My white American professor gave me this advice: do it, publish it, and when the world knows how to do it, US government will be forced to upgrade their outdated ITAR database.
And it was accepted by APEC2018, where the paper will be presented to the world.
At this moment, I've not been deported, and my boss is not fired, at least not yet.
If the ITAR database is outdated, how is your dissertation advancing the state of knowledge? Perhaps it is not the law which is invalid, but your soon to be minted PhD.
Does your professor have deep knowledge about whether this technology is harmful to the US or to the world in general? He is taking the position that he can set or drive US policy. While I agree that many areas of ITAR have been overcome by worldwide development there are other methods for achieving the change. Simple documentation of the facts to the state department actually works, albeit slowly. Individuals should not set national policy, either here in the US or in China. I actually believe China is harsher in its implementation of this concept than the US.
-
The deemed export of restricted technology is a minefield when it comes to non-physical exports, whether it is a non-physical end product (e.g. software) or detailed technical knowledge of a restricted topic. Blurting out the details of restricted technology on the world stage can get you into trouble, if its something the powers that be really care about, and the consequences can be severe. What blueskull described could well put him in danger, unless the ITAR restrictions truly are out of date.
-
The deemed export of restricted technology is a minefield when it comes to non-physical exports, whether it is a non-physical end product (e.g. software) or detailed technical knowledge of a restricted topic. Blurting out the details of restricted technology on the world stage can get you into trouble, if its something the powers that be really care about, and the consequences can be severe. What blueskull described could well put him in danger, unless the ITAR restrictions truly are out of date.
Doesn't matter if they are out of date - except maybe in the appeals process. What matters is if the powers that be care, and if they find out about it. The line from the old "Independence Day" movie - "We don't get out much" really does have a lot of truth in it.
-
When I started my PhD dissertation project, which is a 10kV, 200A, 50ns switching power module, I knew it is ITAR controlled. My white American professor gave me this advice: do it, publish it, and when the world knows how to do it, US government will be forced to upgrade their outdated ITAR database.
And it was accepted by APEC2018, where the paper will be presented to the world.
At this moment, I've not been deported, and my boss is not fired, at least not yet.
What ITAR Regulation did your switching power module break ?
1. If you knew it would break regulations why did you do it ?
2. Why would you arrive to U.S to break the law ?
It is all very strange behavior.
-
The deemed export of restricted technology is a minefield when it comes to non-physical exports, whether it is a non-physical end product (e.g. software) or detailed technical knowledge of a restricted topic. Blurting out the details of restricted technology on the world stage can get you into trouble, if its something the powers that be really care about, and the consequences can be severe. What blueskull described could well put him in danger, unless the ITAR restrictions truly are out of date.
Doesn't matter if they are out of date - except maybe in the appeals process. What matters is if the powers that be care, and if they find out about it. The line from the old "Independence Day" movie - "We don't get out much" really does have a lot of truth in it.
Sure, he's in danger, whether the rules are out of date or not. However, if the powers that be look at it and accept that the rules are out of date, and nobody was making big bucks from the rule breaking, they will probably only take action if someone is having a bad day. Guilt doesn't always lead to prosecution. :)
-
It seems to me that some people do not fully understand the purpose of these restrictions and by there apparent political ignorance potentially put us all in further danger. Anybody with common sense such as the OP can see the potential for misuse of information. I used to work under the then Cocom rules and we felt morally responsible for there implementation but I know some people tried to find way's around them. It is not just thermal imaging but I have seen other discussions here of sensitive technologies sometimes with members who openly admit they are from restricted countries. It is sad that some individuals think it a badge of honor to openly discuss bending the rules.
-
It seems to me that some people do not fully understand the purpose of these restrictions and by there apparent political ignorance potentially put us all in further danger. Anybody with common sense such as the OP can see the potential for misuse of information. I used to work under the then Cocom rules and we felt morally responsible for there implementation but I know some people tried to find way's around them. It is not just thermal imaging but I have seen other discussions here of sensitive technologies sometimes with members who openly admit they are from restricted countries. It is sad that some individuals think it a badge of honor to openly discuss bending the rules.
Yes i think that kind of is the point...
Most people have certain level of common sense and respect for their country to not spread information that can be harmful for the interest of their country of origin or their adopted nation if they are immigrants.
-
It seems to me that some people do not fully understand the purpose of these restrictions and by there apparent political ignorance potentially put us all in further danger. Anybody with common sense such as the OP can see the potential for misuse of information. I used to work under the then Cocom rules and we felt morally responsible for there implementation but I know some people tried to find way's around them. It is not just thermal imaging but I have seen other discussions here of sensitive technologies sometimes with members who openly admit they are from restricted countries. It is sad that some individuals think it a badge of honor to openly discuss bending the rules.
I find that most people who appear deeply knowledgeable about restricted technology give only very general answers about what is possible. Few are dumb enough to give much detail about how something might be achieved. People deep into advanced things are generally excited by their work, and would love to talk about. They usually show considerable restraint.
-
What blueskull described could well put him in danger, unless the ITAR restrictions truly are out of date.
In deed it can. A good friend of the family no longer stepped foot on mainland Europe after an ex work colleague of his got knocked off, for building a well known weapon system for Suddam. He had nothing to do with it, but had worked with him on the original for the Canadian government. The worry was of been kidnapped for his knowledge of such things...
-
...
The problem was, I am in the UK and the chap I was trying to help is in a country that is subject to a wide ranging embargo issued by the UK government. The embargo includes providing technical support for certain controlled technologies.
Whilst my assistance to date was not in any way in depth circuit level information, I could have strayed into dangerous territory oblivious to how such might be considered and viewed as 'too much' by the powers that be :( Technical support is a very loose term and open to interpretation.
...
Fraser
I think it should be noted that regardless of who we might be talking to at the moment on any given page that the forum is totally public, so any information presented here is not only "exported" to the current participants but is "released to the public domain" and can therefore be deemed to be "exported" to anyone, anywhere. I think "releasing to the public domain" also requires permission. If for instance, someone wants to present a "paper" including sensitive information at a technology conference they are expected to get permission to do that ahead of time (at least here in the US).
A thread for this topic is definitely needed; not only to inform people who have not been exposed to the rules but to remind those of us who have been exposed. I thought long & hard about joining this forum to discuss image processing & finally jumped in after finding several university papers on improving thermal images, but still got "caught" later in a framerate discussion, so this is risky business here.
-
So there's 3 categories of things that are being potentially regulated.
1) Hardware, the actual thermal camera.
2) Software, both the PC-side software and the firmware in the hardware.
3) Knowledge, such as technical details of the hardware and software in question.
Of these 3 categories, the least regulated is sure to be the "knowledge" category, at least in the US. The reason for that, is that the act of conveying knowledge is "speech", and the Constitution protects "speech". There have been many dictatorships in the world (including the most infamous in the last century, Nazi Germany) that have banned certain speech by labeling it "dangerous speech", even to the point of literally burning books. The US, from its very start, has made it a high priority to avoid engaging in dictatorship practices, as is codified in the US constitution. There are few exceptions to this. One of these is for government workers, who are forbidden from disseminating "classified information". When a person gets a security clearance (which permits them to access certain information from government computers), they are bound by law to not disseminate any information that is classified (anything marked confidential, secret, or top secret). However, most of us on this forum are not government employees with security clearances, so we aren't bound by law to avoid any information dissemination (assuming you aren't disseminating it for the purpose of helping a criminal, terrorist, or enemy nation, in which case your actions+intent make you guilty of "aiding and abetting"). Furthermore, I don't think technical info regarding non-military thermal imaging devices (like the ones FLIR sells for commercial/industrial purposes, even high end commercial/industrial ones like the T640) is classified information, though some of it might be FLIR trade secrets, which means it's illegal for a FLIR employee to disseminate it.
When it comes to simply conveying knowledge (protected by the US Constitution), you really can only get into legal trouble if you do it for criminal purposes. If for example I posted certain technical info on a forum run by a terrorist group, then it's clear I have the intent to help that terrorist group. Meanwhile, if I post the same info to a general technical forum, accessible to the public, it's clear I don't have any criminal intent, but rather simply want to share information with fellow tech hobbyists, so it's not illegal. As with most other potentially illegal actions, it's not the action alone that is illegal, but rather the combination of action+intent.
-
@Ben321:
"Methinks" you had best review the regulations before making blanket hypothetical declarations regarding how the bureaucratic world behaves.
-
@Beb321:
"Methinks" you had best review the regulations before making blanket hypothetical declarations regarding how the bureaucratic world behaves.
"Methinks" also so.
-
Well, we talk about all kinds of thermal imager topics on these forums, and it's not shut down yet. Thermal imagers for phones have been reverse engineered to so as to write software to run them on the PC. 80x60 thermal imagers have had their firmware settings modified to allow the full 320x240 sensor resolution to be used. So far the only topic on here that has been criticized is talking about how to mod a thermal imager to boost its frame rate. It seems that a lot of technical talk about thermal imagers is permitted on these forums, without fear of the site being shut down by the government.
-
Well, we talk about all kinds of thermal imager topics on these forums, and it's not shut down yet. Thermal imagers for phones have been reverse engineered to so as to write software to run them on the PC. 80x60 thermal imagers have had their firmware settings modified to allow the full 320x240 sensor resolution to be used. So far the only topic on here that has been criticized is talking about how to mod a thermal imager to boost its frame rate. It seems that a lot of technical talk about thermal imagers is permitted on these forums, without fear of the site being shut down by the government.
I am rather convinced if you start instructing a Iranian guy here how to modify their heat seeking missile technology you might find some "trouble".
-
Well, we talk about all kinds of thermal imager topics on these forums, and it's not shut down yet. Thermal imagers for phones have been reverse engineered to so as to write software to run them on the PC. 80x60 thermal imagers have had their firmware settings modified to allow the full 320x240 sensor resolution to be used. So far the only topic on here that has been criticized is talking about how to mod a thermal imager to boost its frame rate. It seems that a lot of technical talk about thermal imagers is permitted on these forums, without fear of the site being shut down by the government.
None of these things are regulated by the government(s), as long as you can't squeeze over 9 frames per second out of them, and that's been locked down and out of our hands(and this forum) fairly well.
The hacks are just hardware modifications that may annoy companies(like FLIR).
-
Ben321,
To quote you
"So far the only topic on here that has been criticized is talking about how to mod a thermal imager to boost its frame rate"
I wonder why that is then :-DD
This forum has a very knowledgeable membership with information spanning many diverse topics. Those who have sensitive information tend to behave themselves and not divulge said information. That is why you read of all manner of thermal camera related topics here, yet the forum breaks no Government regulations. We behave ourselves ;D
Increasing the resolution of a 9fps E4, or reverse engineering a 9fps Lepton based camera dongle breaches neither ITAR nor the Wassenaar arrangement. You have quoted topics that remain innocent and without concern at the Government regulation level.
Now you go out and publicly publish information on how to hack a common consumer grade 9fps 320 x 240 pixel thermal camera for operation at 60fps, and see if the authorities choose to ignore your action. They may, or they may choose to make an example of you. Worth the risk ? I think not. There are areas of thermal imaging that remain 'no go' for public dissemination. That is just the way it is for the moment.
Fraser
-
Ben321,
To quote you
"So far the only topic on here that has been criticized is talking about how to mod a thermal imager to boost its frame rate"
I wonder why that is then :-DD
This forum has a very knowledgeable membership with information spanning many diverse topics. Those who have sensitive information tend to behave themselves and not divulge said information. That is why you read of all manner of thermal camera related topics here, yet the forum breaks no Government regulations. We behave ourselves ;D
Increasing the resolution of a 9fps E4, or reverse engineering a 9fps Lepton based camera dongle breaches neither ITAR nor the Wassenaar arrangement. You have quoted topics that remain innocent and without concern at the Government regulation level.
Now you go out and publicly publish information on how to hack a common consumer grade 9fps 320 x 240 pixel thermal camera for operation at 60fps, and see if the authorities choose to ignore your action. They may, or they may choose to make an example of you. Worth the risk ? I think not. There are areas of thermal imaging that remain 'no go' for public dissemination. That is just the way it is for the moment.
Fraser
You write as if technology is either available to commercial users, or only available to the military. In fact very little technology is only available to the military, but a huge range of technology is only available to qualified end users. Even pretty trivial things can't be exported to a small list of countries that includes North Korea. Other countries have increasing access to technology, depending how sensitive the technology is considered, and how friendly they are considered. In general an end user licence is required to supply anything reasonably sophisticated, but you can get a licence to sell advanced ADCs to Hua Wei to put in a base station. You can't get a licence to supply their neighbours in the defence sector with the same ADCs.
The OP's topic is material openly published on the internet, where the viewers of that material cannot be restricted. Take the rules literally and there is very little you can talk about in an open forum, as a North Korean might read it.
-
Yes, yes, we get it, next time just type NK to save bandwidth, we will know.
-
Coppice,
The reference to a common consumer grade camera that is 9fps was highlighting the fact that such are very easily obtained these days (because they have the lower frame rate). Of course higher frame rate cameras are available to the public in many countries. I have an awful lot of them in my collection after all ;D But who cares if you take a 30fps camera and upgrade it to 60fps ? The owner of the 30fps camera should have already been approved for ownership etc. The removal of the frame rate restriction on a 9fps camera can be a very different matter as such cameras are now commonplace, and the export controls far less strict. I hope this makes sense now ?
I am the OP and your last paragraph meaning is not clear to me
"The OP's topic is material openly published on the internet, where the viewers of that material cannot be restricted. Take the rules literally and there is very little you can talk about in an open forum, as a North Korean might read it"
You can talk about many topics on a technical forum, you just need to be careful when providing technical insight into something that is controlled under ITAR, Dual Use Technology Regulations or the Wassenaar arrangement. We are free to discuss many aspects of thermal camera technology, I do not remember reading anywhere that this is not the case. We are, after all, in a free country and provided we do not cross a legal 'line' we are free to act and talk as we wish.
Fraser
-
Coppice,
I am the OP and your last paragraph meaning is not clear to me
"The OP's topic is material openly published on the internet, where the viewers of that material cannot be restricted. Take the rules literally and there is very little you can talk about in an open forum, as a North Korean might read it"
You can talk about many topics on a technical forum, you just need to be careful when providing technical insight into something that is controlled under ITAR, Dual Use Technology Regulations or the Wassenaar arrangement. We are free to discuss many aspects of thermal camera technology, I do not remember reading anywhere that this is not the case. We are, after all, in a free country and provided we do not cross a legal 'line' we are free to act and talk as we wish.
Fraser
The US rules mean a US semiconductor company, for example, can't sell any semiconductors to North Korea. What does that mean for discussions of relatively low technology in a forum a North Korean can read? I don't know, but it seems like someone could claim even simple technical discussions in open forums have issues.
-
@Coppice,
I added to my last post regarding availability of high frame rate cameras etc. I hope it clarifies my position.
Thanks for the clarification on the last paragraph. I see your point, which is why I created this very thread. Whilst in friendly 'conversation' with someone via a forum, it is too easy to get 'carried away' and provide a little too much technical insight into a topic and potentially breach either an NDA or some other restriction applied to privileged information.
In the case of thermal imaging technology, the 'red lines' that must not be crossed are thankfully pretty clear to those who work in the industry. Where a high performance IC is concerned, the boundaries of technical discussion may be less clear.
We do need to be reasonably careful when discussing some matters on a public forum, but I personally have seen a good level of self control on the EEVBlog forum.
Fraser
-
...
The US rules mean a US semiconductor company, for example, can't sell any semiconductors to North Korea. What does that mean for discussions of relatively low technology in a forum a North Korean can read? I don't know, but it seems like someone could claim even simple technical discussions in open forums have issues.
Is the "any semiconductors to North Korea" part of the ITAR/EAR rules or is that a separate sanction? I couldn't find it quickly. If it's a separate sanction it might only apply to hardware and not the associated information. Plus any "low technology" information is likely already in the public domain.
-
...
The US rules mean a US semiconductor company, for example, can't sell any semiconductors to North Korea. What does that mean for discussions of relatively low technology in a forum a North Korean can read? I don't know, but it seems like someone could claim even simple technical discussions in open forums have issues.
Is the "any semiconductors to North Korea" part of the ITAR/EAR rules or is that a separate sanction? I couldn't find it quickly. If it's a separate sanction it might only apply to hardware and not the associated information. Plus any "low technology" information is likely already in the public domain.
The "comprehensively embargoed countries" under the EAR are currently Crimea Region of the Ukraine, Cuba, Iran, North Korea and Syria. That means you can't do any business at all with them. The other designations of iffy countries are on a sliding scale, where some kinds of business are permitted, with appropriate approval.
-
Does your professor have deep knowledge about whether this technology is harmful to the US or to the world in general?
It's a glorified mosfet, how can it do any harm? The only harm to US is that it breaks its advantage on advanced HV semiconductor, but that's more into commercial section than military section.
Leading edge semiconductors make leading edge weapons. Light, compact, efficient power electronics is crucial to improving all sorts of weapon systems. You don't want to starve most potential adversaries of all power electronics, but you do want to maintain an edge in how well your's performs. If you don't, you risk increased deaths in a conflict, and perhaps the loss of one. Doesn't that sound harmful?
-
Leading edge semiconductors make leading edge weapons. Light, compact, efficient power electronics is crucial to improving all sorts of weapon systems. You don't want to starve most potential adversaries of all power electronics, but you do want to maintain an edge in how well your's performs. If you don't, you risk increased deaths in a conflict, and perhaps the loss of one. Doesn't that sound harmful?
How about the reduction of loss of life starts from the West stop policing the world?
I wouldn't call the West's ravenous plundering of the world's resources policing. Voters do expect their way of life to be maintained with the minimise loss of life on their own side, though. Policies have to follow that desire.
-
Of these 3 categories, the least regulated is sure to be the "knowledge" category, at least in the US. The reason for that, is that the act of conveying knowledge is "speech", and the Constitution protects "speech".
...
When it comes to simply conveying knowledge (protected by the US Constitution), you really can only get into legal trouble if you do it for criminal purposes.
Not everyone on this forum is under the jurisdiction of the US Constitution and its First Amendment. There are many other countries which generally have wide freedom of speech, but even so, not all of them have the exact same freedom in all the details (in some cases, they are allowed to say things that some US citizens could be jailed for saying, in other cases, they could be jailed for saying things US citizens could say with impunity).
Under the US Constitution, the freedom of speech is not absolute. Recall Julius and Ethel Rosenberg, who were sentenced to death in the US for "simply conveying knowledge", as you say.
In order to know whether the intent is a necessary element of the criminal offense, you must read the statute, and in some instances, the case law, regarding the particular offense for which you may be charged. In many cases, intent is important, but not necessarily always. And even when intent is important, it's not always intent to commit a crime that's important.
-
How many of you guys have a real handle on the process of ITAR? Can someone who knows advise if this process is roughly correct.
This is paraphrased from the following document:
https://www.bis.doc.gov/index.php/documents/regulation-docs/414-part-738-commerce-control-list-overview-and-the-country-chart/file (https://www.bis.doc.gov/index.php/documents/regulation-docs/414-part-738-commerce-control-list-overview-and-the-country-chart/file)
All of these documents come from this page:
https://www.bis.doc.gov/index.php/regulations/export-administration-regulations-ear (https://www.bis.doc.gov/index.php/regulations/export-administration-regulations-ear)
1. Find the ECCN number in this document (electronics catgory 3):
https://www.bis.doc.gov/index.php/documents/regulations-docs/federal-register-notices/federal-register-2014/990-ccl3-2/file (https://www.bis.doc.gov/index.php/documents/regulations-docs/federal-register-notices/federal-register-2014/990-ccl3-2/file)
2. In that section there is a reason for control.
3. Take the reason's for control and the country you are exporting to, and look it up in this document:
https://www.bis.doc.gov/index.php/documents/regulations-docs/federal-register-notices/federal-register-2014/1033-738-supp-1/file (https://www.bis.doc.gov/index.php/documents/regulations-docs/federal-register-notices/federal-register-2014/1033-738-supp-1/file)
4: If there is an X in any of the relevant boxes then you need a license. If you there is no X's which apply, and as long as no other limitations or rules apply, then you don't need a license.
Interestingly if you see something coded Anti Terrorism (AT) then it can be exported pretty much anywhere
So to take one of blueskulls examples of 3A.228c
NP column 1 is the biggest limitation, and means it can't be exported to China without a license, but can go to most of Europe, Australia, NZ and quite a few of other places.
-
This is all very interesting. I endorse Fraser's original point about there being areas where one needs to be careful.
The (US) doctrine of information being 'born secret' is interesting. If, for example, a college student in Milwaukee worked out how to make tomato sauce undergo rapid and uncontrolled nuclear fission (ie made a tomato sauce-based nuclear bomb) then that knowledge would fall into the 'born secret' category. Even posting a 'wow I did it' on Facebook would mean deep trouble for the individuals concerned - even if they had only set out to make a particularly tangy pasta sauce. Publishing the whole recipie, eg on a forum akin to this one, would immediately make every tomato-producing nation functionally equal to the presently rather exclusive club of nuclear weapon-equipped states.
A device capable of switching tens of kilovolts at hundreds of amps in microseconds has many applications, not all of them civilian. It may be instructive to look up 'Trigatron' and 'Thyratron' on Wikipedia to learn about how those devices - which have their roots in the 1920s - are useful if you can't get the tomato sauce to co-operate and have to use other materials for your recipies of mass destruction.
I like playing with thermal cameras, the higher the resolution and frame rate the better. At present I'm capable of making 20 megapixel still (landscape) shots with moderately readily available equipment (though I'd love a sponsor with better equipment and a travel budget!). Even with only a layman's knowledge of thermal imaging I can easily see that the equipment I use could be very helpful to a person or nation with nefarious intentions and, whilst I would dearly love ultra-high resolution, fast frame rate cameras to be freely available on the open market to the 'good guys', I understand that not everyone has peaceful intentions and thus reluctantly support the trade restrictions. As we all can imagine, it's easy enough for a nation-state to quietly spirit a couple of devices away in a diplomatic bag. But the fact that someone from the Peoples Democratic Republic of Personality Cult can't just walk into a Flir showroom and order ten thousand state of the art thermal sights is, I think, a good thing. And it's not as though I have much of a choice in the matter - them's the laws.
-
Tomato sauce do not have atoms that release enough neutrons to cause cumulative/sustained fission.
-
No you need good'ol HP Brown Sauce for that :-DD
Thanks for your input Ultrapurple. That is the situation in a nutshell :-+
Fraser
-
The idea behind starting this thread was to highlight the challenges that we, as members of a public forum, face when discussing a technology that has 'supply and information' restrictions applied to it by powers with the ability to punish those who breach said restrictions.
I did not, and do not, want this thread to cause a rift between forum members as all are entitled to their opinions. I am hoping that this thread will act as guidance or a mild warning regarding certain actions involving discussion of some types of thermal imaging device.
I reverse engineered the FLIR PM570 in order to better understand its design and to repair a faulty camera. It was 3 months of hard work and I am proud of achievement. That pride could get me into trouble though if I had been unaware of the restrictions on the technology and published the complete schematic diagrams on this forum. I am by no means certain that I would have been pursued by FLIR and/or the US Government for such an act. But would I wish to risk such ? In my case no. In truth the schematics do not show the whole story as FPGA/CPLD configuration files and system firmware are not made available. All the schematics actually show is basically an 'AMIGA 520ST like' topology with some I/O 'bolt-ons', and a dedicated video processor board. Not rocket science, but the restrictions on sharing deep technical detail on such thermal cameras prohibits me releasing such into the public domain. I obey the laws of my country.
We live in an imperfect world and sadly where technology is considered a potential aid to 'enemies of the state', it often has restrictions applied to it. As has already been highlighted by Ben321, this forum still manages to discuss thermal imaging camera technology, and its improvement, without breaching any Government regulations. It is true that FLIR would rather this forum had not given birth to the Ex series camera upgrade, but nobody got pursued in court and no 'take down' notices were issued to Dave.
It will be noted that any discussions regarding how to increase the frame rate on the Ex series, or their kin, normally gets a quick warning from either me or another forum member regarding the issues of releasing such an upgrade into the public domain. Whilst I am aware of how difficult it would actually be to circumvent the frame rate restriction, I would not put it past the clever membership of this forum to work out a way if they applied their mind to the problem. Those with that skill set recognise the issues surrounding such an 'upgrade' though. Hence it has not been pursued on this forum.
This is a great forum and this Thermal Imaging Sub Forum is unique on the internet. No one wants to spoil that but we do need to be responsible in our discussions. There is much that can be discussed without concern to the 'authorities' so we have some great threads here. Long may it continue :-+
Fraser
-
Blueskull you have your reasons and beliefs. No amount of argument from any of us is going to change your mind. I will ask one further question.
Do you and your professor realize that you are not the only ones at risk from your action. If someone decides that it is important your entire university could lose the ability to receive those funds you so proudly describe. The grants, the equipment, everything.
You perhaps do not place much value on this. I suspect your professor, if he thought it through and discussed it with his department might not be so cavalier.
-
Blueskull you have your reasons and beliefs. No amount of argument from any of us is going to change your mind. I will ask one further question.
Do you and your professor realize that you are not the only ones at risk from your action. If someone decides that it is important your entire university could lose the ability to receive those funds you so proudly describe. The grants, the equipment, everything.
You perhaps do not place much value on this. I suspect your professor, if he thought it through and discussed it with his department might not be so cavalier.
I don’t think you quite understand Blueskull’s point.
Basically, the United States Department of Energy gave him a grant to research this high speed, high voltage switching technology. Part of that grant involves publishing the information obtained through his research.
In essence, the US government is paying him to violate ITAR.
-
I don’t think you quite understand Blueskull’s point.
Basically, the United States Department of Energy gave him a grant to research this high speed, high voltage switching technology. Part of that grant involves publishing the information obtained through his research.
In essence, the US government is paying him to violate ITAR.
On the one hand, this is a really good thing about US government funded research. The results of that research are usually placed into the public domain, with the enlightened idea that it will stimulate business and trade through people taking that information and commercializing it.
On the other hand, many published papers and presentations concentrate on the results, while leaving the details of how to obtain the results carefully and creatively incomplete :) I have lost count of the number of times I have read a paper and found crucial details left out. It's like having a jigsaw puzzle with a number of pieces missing.
-
Interesting point referenced on Wikipedia, possibly pertinent to the discussion at hand.
"The ITAR specifies that the products of "fundamental research" are not considered controlled "technical data," so long as they are published freely. Fundamental research is defined as university-based "basic and applied research in science and engineering where the resulting information is ordinarily published and shared broadly within the scientific community, as distinguished from research the results of which are restricted for proprietary reasons or specific U.S. Government access and dissemination controls."
http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/retrieveECFR?gp=&SID=df3f1df6ae91cbdda2843035ec5b7fdf&mc=true&r=PART&n=pt22.1.120 (http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/retrieveECFR?gp=&SID=df3f1df6ae91cbdda2843035ec5b7fdf&mc=true&r=PART&n=pt22.1.120)
-
Blueskull you have your reasons and beliefs. No amount of argument from any of us is going to change your mind. I will ask one further question.
Do you and your professor realize that you are not the only ones at risk from your action. If someone decides that it is important your entire university could lose the ability to receive those funds you so proudly describe. The grants, the equipment, everything.
You perhaps do not place much value on this. I suspect your professor, if he thought it through and discussed it with his department might not be so cavalier.
I don’t think you quite understand Blueskull’s point.
Basically, the United States Department of Energy gave him a grant to research this high speed, high voltage switching technology. Part of that grant involves publishing the information obtained through his research.
In essence, the US government is paying him to violate ITAR.
Right. It seems that ITAR, like other heavy handed government legislation (DMCA, the Patriot Act, etc) is there, at least in part, to be selectively used when the state decides they need a reason to go after an individual or organization.
Based on Blueskull's report, his research is implicitly sanctioned by the US government which is why his faculty advisor, and others in his department are not alarmed or concerned. I have no doubt this is not the first instance where this has come up for them.
-
1. If you knew it would break regulations why did you do it ?
2. Why would you arrive to U.S to break the law ?
My research breaks EAR 3A.001h, 3A.201a and 3A.228c.
Just for the fun, go to check out 3A.201a2, you will see how stupid US government legislators are.
Why did I do it? Well, my boss, ultimately, USDoE, paid me to do it.
This work has been shown to DoD, DoE and people from Lockhead Martin, and nobody raised a flag.
As a side note, due to the nature of our research, half or more people in my facility knowingly or unknowingly are breaking ITAR rules, and almost all our fundings are from wither NSF or DoE. We have ~100 people here, and 80%+ are non-American.
If US government doesn't want us to do it, how about not paying us to do it in the first place?
I had some cursory look at the regulations mentioned and soon found it would take professionally trained person to decipher the meanings of the particular regulations their real life applications and possible enforcement.
For a laymens perspective there are some concerns.
1.If your research has been funded by USDoE do USDoE actually know they are funding you to do this particular project ? You say your "boss" funds you (assuming from the funds given to him by USDoE) Has he been given authorization by USDoE to fund your project?
2.If he is funding your project without been given authorization by USDoE you are in effect working for him rather than USDoE and you are responsible for any legal considerations that may arise.
3.These concerns go to all of the parties involved "DOD DoE LH" they might know of the research... but they might not know who is doing it and with what authorization.
There is two options.
1.Your professor is being a twat and using you to make a point on your expense (might have been burned by himself by the regulations and want to "show them")
2.He is just yanking your chain and been given authorization for your work.
Any case do not "trust" you professor in such subjects get some legal advise or consult USDoE.
I do not think this really is a bid deal... doubt your research is such that it would be of concern but if they want to get on you well...
You know the situation better any case so you do as you think is best.
On side note if your research is such that it has military applications and you are planning to publish comprehensive designs notes including and or excluding design itself to public domain i really think you should reconsider.
Just my feeling of course i might know nothing at all about this.
-
I had some cursory look at the regulations mentioned and soon found it would take professionally trained person to decipher the meanings of the particular regulations their real life applications and possible enforcement.
...
On side note if your research is such that it has military applications and you are planning to publish comprehensive designs notes including and or excluding design itself to public domain i really think you should reconsider.
Just my feeling of course i might know nothing at all about this.
Do you not think that a university department, faculty staff, legal advisers and government representatives count as "professionally trained persons"?
On your second note, keep in mind that research students do not publish on their own account. Their work is done for and on behalf of the university, and is owned by the university. Just as in a business situation it is generally the employer that is on the hook, not the employee.
-
I had some cursory look at the regulations mentioned and soon found it would take professionally trained person to decipher the meanings of the particular regulations their real life applications and possible enforcement.
...
On side note if your research is such that it has military applications and you are planning to publish comprehensive designs notes including and or excluding design itself to public domain i really think you should reconsider.
Just my feeling of course i might know nothing at all about this.
Do you not think that a university department, faculty staff, legal advisers and government representatives count as "professionally trained persons"?
On your second note, keep in mind that research students do not publish on their own account. Their work is done for and on behalf of the university, and is owned by the university. Just as in a business situation it is generally the employer that is on the hook, not the employee.
One would hope that would be true sadly it is not the case here.
The person who is doing the research knows the exact rules he is going against as do his "white" professor.
When I started my PhD dissertation project, which is a 10kV, 200A, 50ns switching power module, I knew it is ITAR controlled. My white American professor gave me this advice: do it, publish it, and when the world knows how to do it, US government will be forced to upgrade their outdated ITAR database.
Rules quoted by him he is actively breaking
My research breaks EAR 3A.001h, 3A.201a and 3A.228c.
Just for the fun, go to check out 3A.201a2, you will see how stupid US government legislators are.
He acknowledges he is breaking the law.
The traditional way to do 10kV+ switching is by using either vacuum switch or by using monolithic semiconductor switch, where 10kV+ semicon switches are really hard to make and hence being controlled by ITAR.
He admits he is working against U.S interests (while being funded by U.S working in U.S with visa)
It's a glorified mosfet, how can it do any harm? The only harm to US is that it breaks its advantage on advanced HV semiconductor, but that's more into commercial section than military section.
He shows his political feelings.. While accepting money from U.S and being funded by U.S tax payer and still wants to work there .. hmmm
How about the reduction of loss of life starts from the West stop policing the world?
We might not care of such things but there might be people who do in U.S :-//
-
Interesting point referenced on Wikipedia, possibly pertinent to the discussion at hand.
"The ITAR specifies that the products of "fundamental research" are not considered controlled "technical data," so long as they are published freely. Fundamental research is defined as university-based "basic and applied research in science and engineering where the resulting information is ordinarily published and shared broadly within the scientific community, as distinguished from research the results of which are restricted for proprietary reasons or specific U.S. Government access and dissemination controls."
http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/retrieveECFR?gp=&SID=df3f1df6ae91cbdda2843035ec5b7fdf&mc=true&r=PART&n=pt22.1.120 (http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/retrieveECFR?gp=&SID=df3f1df6ae91cbdda2843035ec5b7fdf&mc=true&r=PART&n=pt22.1.120)
I think the reasoning behind this is that the results of fundamental research rarely have military value on their own, and there are strong reasons why basic knowledge about the universe should be open. There is a huge chunk of engineering between the pure science and the things that kill people, and that's what ITAR tries to keep out of their opponent's hands.
This is irrelevant to the present discussion about university work like blueskull's, as that is purely engineering research.
-
Blueskull you have your reasons and beliefs. No amount of argument from any of us is going to change your mind. I will ask one further question.
Do you and your professor realize that you are not the only ones at risk from your action. If someone decides that it is important your entire university could lose the ability to receive those funds you so proudly describe. The grants, the equipment, everything.
You perhaps do not place much value on this. I suspect your professor, if he thought it through and discussed it with his department might not be so cavalier.
I don’t think you quite understand Blueskull’s point.
Basically, the United States Department of Energy gave him a grant to research this high speed, high voltage switching technology. Part of that grant involves publishing the information obtained through his research.
In essence, the US government is paying him to violate ITAR.
I did understand his comment. But he has also personally stated that he is violating ITAR. So he has a personal responsibility to clarify the position, as does his professor. They may feel that it is a cause worth fighting for. Just as protesters on many subjects allow themselves to be arrested to force a court review of the subjects. That is a personal decision on their part that may or may not be supported by the university.
I do not find it surprising that a bureaucracy as large as the US government has internal conflicts. But when the elephants dance it pays the mice to take cover. Unless of course they feel strongly about changing the dance steps of one or more of the elephants.
When the dust all settles, Blueskull may be vindicated and the ITAR rules in this area will change. Or maybe this will all just fade away as a non-issue. Whether it will have been worth it to him and his professor is something only they can evaluate. My latest comment was only to assist him in evaluating some of the downside risks. It is only prudent for someone entering any activity to know both costs and benefits (from their own point of view) and presumably only enter those activities whose benefits outweigh the costs.
In this particular case Blueskull already has a large sunk investment in his PhD project. It would be very difficult for him to change course no matter what his current evaluation of the downside risk.
-
Interesting point referenced on Wikipedia, possibly pertinent to the discussion at hand.
"The ITAR specifies that the products of "fundamental research" are not considered controlled "technical data," so long as they are published freely. Fundamental research is defined as university-based "basic and applied research in science and engineering where the resulting information is ordinarily published and shared broadly within the scientific community, as distinguished from research the results of which are restricted for proprietary reasons or specific U.S. Government access and dissemination controls."
http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/retrieveECFR?gp=&SID=df3f1df6ae91cbdda2843035ec5b7fdf&mc=true&r=PART&n=pt22.1.120 (http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/retrieveECFR?gp=&SID=df3f1df6ae91cbdda2843035ec5b7fdf&mc=true&r=PART&n=pt22.1.120)
I think the reasoning behind this is that the results of fundamental research rarely have military value on their own, and there are strong reasons why basic knowledge about the universe should be open. There is a huge chunk of engineering between the pure science and the things that kill people, and that's what ITAR tries to keep out of their opponent's hands.
This is irrelevant to the present discussion about university work like blueskull's, as that is purely engineering research.
Yes I see your point - when I read it I saw it like this:
"Fundamental research is defined as university based basic and applied research in science and engineering..."
-
Interesting point referenced on Wikipedia, possibly pertinent to the discussion at hand.
"The ITAR specifies that the products of "fundamental research" are not considered controlled "technical data," so long as they are published freely. Fundamental research is defined as university-based "basic and applied research in science and engineering where the resulting information is ordinarily published and shared broadly within the scientific community, as distinguished from research the results of which are restricted for proprietary reasons or specific U.S. Government access and dissemination controls."
http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/retrieveECFR?gp=&SID=df3f1df6ae91cbdda2843035ec5b7fdf&mc=true&r=PART&n=pt22.1.120 (http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/retrieveECFR?gp=&SID=df3f1df6ae91cbdda2843035ec5b7fdf&mc=true&r=PART&n=pt22.1.120)
I think the reasoning behind this is that the results of fundamental research rarely have military value on their own, and there are strong reasons why basic knowledge about the universe should be open. There is a huge chunk of engineering between the pure science and the things that kill people, and that's what ITAR tries to keep out of their opponent's hands.
This is irrelevant to the present discussion about university work like blueskull's, as that is purely engineering research.
Yes - I think some are not getting that University research (and its publication) that violates ITAR is probably very common and in fact often encouraged by the US government.
Blueskull specifically stated that his research was in part funded by the DoE and other research in his department was funded by the DoD (and demonstrated to military contractors). I saw this as well when, as a PhD student in neuroscience in the 1980s, one of my departments most prominent PIs had a large lab that recieived large amounts of funding from the DoD. (They were working with a glutamate receptor antagonist that had the ability to prevent short term memory formation - you can guess why the military might want to have such an agent for battlefield use....).
The military relies heavily on University based research which is invariably published and publically available.
-
In essence, the US government is paying him to violate ITAR.
At that point, is it even a violation anymore? If it's okayed by the government, doesn't that mean that anything he does pursuant to the government's wishes does is in effect a lawful action? While the actions may be actions that normally would constitute an ITAR violation, if the government has granted his university's research lab a waver for the research, then it's no longer a violation. Either that, or the government bureaucracy is so big, that not every part of the government is aware of everything else going on in the government, such that those funding the research aren't even aware that the research violates ITAR.
-
In essence, the US government is paying him to violate ITAR.
At that point, is it even a violation anymore? If it's okayed by the government, doesn't that mean that anything he does pursuant to the government's wishes does is in effect a lawful action? While the actions may be actions that normally would constitute an ITAR violation, if the government has granted his university's research lab a waver for the research, then it's no longer a violation. Either that, or the government bureaucracy is so big, that not every part of the government is aware of everything else going on in the government, such that those funding the research aren't even aware that the research violates ITAR.
I’d argue the former point in court, if I were a lawyer. Though I wouldn’t be surprised if the latter were the actual case.
-
There are countless laws and regulations that are selectively enforced - at every level of government. ITAR is one of those.
-
Here in the US it is extremely common for various agencies to be at odds over regulations. Think of highway departments and environmental management agencies. In some cases it is literally impossible to comply with the various regulations.
-
I do not think this is actually that inconsistent.
ITAR is a list of things that are controlled as having primarily military uses, and control by the US State Department. It is not a list of things that must never be published / exported, just things where you get permission FIRST for the intended use.
In having a 'public' body that is bound to publish, and foreign nationals working on this, DoE are likely to have the permissions (generally or specifically) from State.
As Hendorog said, research disclosure is permitted.
Bill
-
There are countless laws and regulations that are selectively enforced - at every level of government. ITAR is one of those.
I have always thought that if 'they' want to get you, 'they' will find some convenient, long-forgotten (but not repealed) law to catch you out - even if only on a holding charge so 'they' can conduct various otherwise-illegal 'fishing-trip' searches whilst simultaneously trying to get you to incriminate yourself whilst under the stress of arrest.
Leaving aside famous cases like Al Capone (jailed for tax evasion, rather than racketeering, murder or whatever), my favourites are 'loitering with intent to use a pedestrian crossing', 'wearing a loud shirt in a built-up area during the hours of darkness', 'coughing without due care and attention' and 'having an offensive wife'. (Actually, all of these were adapted from the 1980-ish British satirical programme Not The Nine O'Clock News (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Not_the_Nine_O%27Clock_News) but there are some historical precedents (https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=ElOwF9qGzpYC&pg=PT206&lpg=PT206&dq=wearing+a+loud+shirt+in+a+built+up+area&source=bl&ots=NjmZ78dA16&sig=sBDM9p03AuYMH1NZOmm9FHWNzSM&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiW-6jk-NbXAhVDAcAKHUOBCZMQ6AEISzAF#v=onepage&q=wearing%20a%20loud%20shirt%20in%20a%20built%20up%20area&f=false)).
In less-civilised countries some rather more unsubtle methods may be employed instead.
-
What may be the most frequently repeated line in the "export controls training" I received was something like "...ask your location's export compliance officer" (officer/team/department/staff, whatever the term was). All of the defense contractors, and probably every college that does affected research, have somewhere between a handful & a marching army of people who's job it is to prevent fines from being imposed on the organization. It is their job to determine if a license is needed and to apply for such licenses, BUT they do not typically go around asking people what they are doing or planning on doing in order to determine if they need a license. Everyone working on such stuff is supposed to be "trained" enough to seek guidance from the marching army when needed.
So anyone in @blueskull's position is supposed to know to ask the export compliance team to find the correct answer, not some professor who does not give a rip if the US has any advantages over its enemies. It is far better to be chided by a co-worker than to wait for the bureaucrats to discover that a violation occurred. Taking longer to get down to your level is not much consolation & from what I've seen in the corporate world they tend to start at the bottom anyway; the little guy gets punished first. Hopefully the prof. would get caught in the dragnet too, but he might get off with mere removal from the project and extra "training".
We had an instance at work one time where a guy took some stuff to the shipping department to have it sent across the border. The lowly shipping dept. person started asking appropriate questions & was able to recognize that a license was likely needed. The guy who brought the package AND the guy who gave it to him got such a swift lesson in export compliance that it scared the feces out of them, but they kept their jobs & did not go to jail or lose all their assets--because a violation was prevented.
-
Give that packing clerk a bonus and a raise.