One of the amendments added to the bill would grant the Commerce Department secretary the power to outlaw the export of encryption products that he or she thinks could be used in the commission of organized crime, the transmission of sexual material and a number of other illegal acts. That amendment, sponsored by Reps. Michael G. Oxley, R-Ohio, and Heather Wilson, R-N.M., passed in a 19-4 vote.

Meanwhile, the House Select Committee on Intelligence today is expected to hold a closed hearing on the bill.

The House Subcommittee on Telecommunications, Trade and Consumer Protection voted the SAFE Act, H.R. 850, through on a voice vote. It also held a voice vote on a separate amendment from Oxley and Wilson that grants the Commerce Department a 30-day review of encryption products that companies submit, rather than the 15-day review period specified in the bill, which was introduced by Rep. Robert Goodlatte, R-Va.

The modified bill also would establish a dedicated FBI lab to track the illegal use of encryption products, though the bill does not specify any funding resources. Subcommittee Chairman W.J. "Billy" Tauzin, R-La., suggested that private industry may be willing to ante up some cash.

Both of Oxley's and Wilson's amendments raised the ire of many of the SAFE Act supporters, though some of these same supporters, including Rep. Anna Eshoo, D-Calif., later perplexed some industry watchers by voting for one of the amendments. Wilson, who admitted that some of her ideas were suggested by the National Security Agency - a notorious SAFE foe - said that although she is a free- trade Republican, she cannot set aside the possibility that unregulated strong encryption could pose a terrorist and criminal threat to the US.

Oxley said that although 40-bit and 56-bit encryption can be broken, it takes more time and money to break these codes than the time in which the average criminal can do it.

SAFE Act proponents, however, suggested that Oxley and Wilson simply were trying to derail the bill. Rep. Anna Eshoo, D-Calif., said she suspected that Wilson's proposal to make a 30-day Commerce Department review period was not suggested by anyone in that department.

Markey said that prohibiting the availability of strong encryption to deter organized crime is like denying the use of vehicles because "the Mafia uses automobiles in their getaways, (and) they use pens for their stickup notes."

The subcommittee also rejected two amendments from Rep. Clifford Stearns, R-Fla., one of which would have forced subpoenaed parties to decrypt documents called for in court cases, with failure to comply resulting in five to 10 years in prison.

Tauzin and Ranking Democrat Edward Markey, D-Mass., said that the amendment violates the Fifth Amendment right against self- incrimination. Tauzin and Eshoo noted that the amendment also would, in effect, require all encryption to contain backdoor - or "key recovery" - entrances.

"Would (that mean) AOL has the ability to decrypt private e-mail?" Eshoo asked.

Stearns' other amendment would have forbidden encryption exports with algorithm complexities greater than 56 bits, and also would have prohibited all exports to China, Hong Kong and Macao unless the recipients were "US persons."

Rep. James Rogan, R-Calif., said the Stearns amendment runs afoul even of Rep. Christopher Cox's, R-Calif., report on technology transfers to China, noting that Cox himself supports the availability of strong encryption to China.

Tauzin offered several other amendments to the bill that were generally accepted, including one in which the Commerce Department's National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) would study the availability of different encryption products exportable under the bill. The amended bill also would direct the Commerce Department secretary to study the foreign barriers to the entry of US businesses into the encryption market, and the president to conduct negotiations with potential trading partners.

Tauzin also said the new bill would remove encryption law provisions from Title 18 of the US criminal code and place them in a separate area. It also would charge the NTIA with developing regulations for encryption in telecommunications and network-related issues.