be completed perhaps as a result of the export controls the warrantee might have tried to make a claim against the warranty in processing the claim the supporting infrastructure would have obtained the complete transaction and discovered that it was in violation of law and therefore not subject to warranty protection on the other hand if the warranty subject had included the cryptographic u201c transaction element category u201d in message 2 this along with u201c information related to the warrantee u201d of message 4 would allow local representative 2 to detect a questionable transaction in this case because of the non us status of the warrantee it should be noted that the issue here is not one of export control but rather the legitimacy or legality of the transaction in the context of warranty coverage as defined in contracts between local representative 1 and client 1 and between local representative 2 and client 2 the extent of the actual coverage provisions may vary for example coverage may deal strictly with guaranteeing the accuracy of the delivered warranty parameter information or may guarantee certain aspects of actual transaction fulfillment to be carried out by the warranty subject even if certain transaction aspects are guaranteed the warrantee may want to use warranty parameter.