On Fri, Dec 7, 2012 at 4:24 PM, Chris Cappuccio <ch...@nmedia.net> wrote: > Maximo Pech [mak...@gmail.com] wrote: >> I said I can't code that. > > If you already knew the answer was "write it", then you asked the wrong > question. > >> I know that gnupg is in the ports tree, but it >> just seems strange to me that it isn't on the base system, because for me >> it sounds logical that if one of the key points of openbsd is cryptography, >> it would have a bsd tool like gnupg. The netpgp thing looks very cool, I >> didn't know about it. >> > > Do you have any idea how abusrd this is? > >> So my question is why there isn't a tool like that on base, I'm asking out >> of curiosity, maybe some historical, reason, technical... I'm not trying to >> point this as a fault, I just want to understand better the fact that gnupg >> or a bsd licensed equivalent isn't in the base system. >> > > The original PGP program was mostly public domain. As time went on, it went > to a > highly restrictive license. GnuPG, and later, NetPGP represent the people who > had desires to fix that problem. If you want to do it again, nobody will stop > you. > > OpenSSH and OpenBSD IPsec represent the OpenBSD solutions to the quality and > licensing problems in those areas. OpenSSH is still the gold standard, > OCF/IPsec, > maybe not. PGP worked, was public domain, encrypts files, and solved one > problem. > Network layer encryption is an entirely different, and for many, a much more > important problem.
SSH is the gold standard: OpenSSH is the popular and effective freeware version, which did solve a number of issues. The early history of SSH is interesting, and covered reasonably well at http://docstore.mik.ua/orelly/networking_2ndEd/ssh/ch01_05.htm.
