<table><tr><th>From:</th><th>Vincenzo lozzo</th></tr><tr><td>Sent:</td><td>Friday, October 2, 2015 8:58 AM</td></tr><tr><td>To:</td><td>Jeffrey E.</td></tr><tr><td>Cc:</td><td>Joshua Cooper Ramo</td></tr><tr><td>Subject:</td><td>"report" on the EU event</td></tr></table>

Jeffrey&Joshua,

since both of you helped reviewing the doc I figured I'd share =he results and also thank both of you again.

First the things that might be interesting for you in the medium term: =1) The EU is committed to introduce liabilities for software vendors. =hey are yet trying to figure out how to do it but I do think it will =ventually go through in 3-5 years from now, especially as the loT stuff =ecomes bigger. If that works out it will be a pretty good opportunity =o make money in security

2) The EU wants to add to the list of export controlled items stuff like =d printing, bio engineering and some of the drones stuff. This will =ave a number of interesting consequences for various startups (assuming =t does happen) 3) Not security related but I had breakfast with a UK delegation to the =U, they were in Brussels to discuss the single digital market stuff. =pparently it's quite "scary" in the sense that =ultiple countries are actually trying to push to curb services like =etflix to prevail over the local competitors. What's going to =appen in the end is unclear but if that does go through american =onsumer startups will have some troubles

Now the bragging part:

1) We finally got Privacy International and a couple of other human =ights organizations to admit they were wrong about exploits. Which is =wesome because I was tired of people labeling anybody associated with =ffensive security as a "merchant of death". Also on =witter: https://twitter.com/richietynan/status/649510644891435008

2) The EU Commission seems to be ready to leave exploits out of the =xport control stuff, not a done deal but that would be awesome

3) The MEP that is sort of driving this essentially incorporated almost =11 our proposals in her submission to the Commission.

4) They will try to help to get us in touch with the people at the =ational level who can get Wassenaar changed. We are talking with the =tate Department and the DHS as well, so hopefully by 2016 we'll =ave a revised version of WA without the horrible wording on exploits

Overall I think we had an half-victory which is a lot more than what I =ould have expected! Assuming all of this goes as planned it will be =uite good for the industry because people will be able to do research =hich implies that companies will still have to invest heavily in =ecurity.

Thanks again :)

V

<?xml version=.0" encoding=TF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE plist PUBLIC "-//Apple//DTD PLIST 1.0//EN" "http://www.apple.com/DTDs/PropertyList-1.0.dtd">
<plist version=.0">
<dict>
<key>conversation-id</key>
<integer>102576</integer>
</dict>

</dict>
</plist>

<key>date-last-viewed</key>
<integer>0</integer>
<key>date-received</key>
<integer>1443776305</integer>
<key>flags</key>
<integer>8590195713</integer>
<key>gmail-label-ids</key>
<array>
<integer>6</integer>
<integer>2</integer>
</array>
<key>remote-id</key>
<string>548651</string>