Re: SSH never free

1999-10-06 Thread Herbert Xu
Marco d'Itri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Oct 02, Herbert Xu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >The patent makes it non-free, so does the new license. > Really? In my country RSA is not patented, why should I care about what > happens in someone else country? Please have a look at our policy. -

Re: SSH never free

1999-10-05 Thread Marco d'Itri
On Oct 02, Herbert Xu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >The patent makes it non-free, so does the new license. Really? In my country RSA is not patented, why should I care about what happens in someone else country? -- ciao, Marco

Re: SSH never free

1999-10-03 Thread Bob Nielsen
On Sat, Oct 02, 1999 at 11:57:07PM -0700, Joseph Carter wrote: > On Sun, Oct 03, 1999 at 08:54:48AM +1000, Craig Sanders wrote: > > PS: the RSA patent expires in 2001 (or is it 2002?), anyway. > > 20 September 2000. Does anyone know when the LZW patent expires? -- Bob Nielsen I

Re: SSH never free

1999-10-03 Thread Joseph Carter
On Sun, Oct 03, 1999 at 08:54:48AM +1000, Craig Sanders wrote: > PS: the RSA patent expires in 2001 (or is it 2002?), anyway. 20 September 2000. -- Joseph Carter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Debian GNU/Linux developer GnuPG: 2048g/3F9C2A43 - 20F6 2261 F185 7A3E 79FC 44F9 8FF7 D7A3 DCF9 DAB3

Re: SSH never free

1999-10-03 Thread Nicolás Lichtmaier
> > > [ RSA is no longer included. ] > > > [ IDEA is no longer included. ] > > IDEA was the only part of ssh that made it non-free, prohibiting > > commercial use. > Wrong, RSA makes it non-free, and so does their license. Wrong, RSA makes it non-us. I can freely use RSA here.

Re: SSH never free

1999-10-02 Thread Craig Sanders
On Sat, Oct 02, 1999 at 10:06:24AM +1000, Herbert Xu wrote: > They use libssl, which begs the question why isn't libssl in > non-US/non-free? i thought that only copyright/license and *not* patent issues determined whether we considered something to be free or non-free. e.g. libssl is completely

Re: SSH never free

1999-10-02 Thread James Troup
Herbert Xu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > They use libssl, which begs the question why isn't libssl in non-US/non-free? Uh, because I keep forgetting. I've been meaning to do that since Guy split non-US up... I guess I'll go file a bug against ftp.debian.org. -- James

Re: SSH never free

1999-10-02 Thread Edward Betts
Joel Klecker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > If we step into the "patents make something non-free" trap, then we > probably have a lot of things in main that should be moved to > non-free because they technically infringe on someone's stupid patent. Living in the UK, where there are currently no so

Re: SSH never free

1999-10-02 Thread Herbert Xu
Joel Klecker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > At 10:06 +1000 1999-10-02, Herbert Xu wrote: >>They use libssl, which begs the question why isn't libssl in non-US/non-free? > Uh, because it isn't non-free? Here's a quote from the policy: `Non-free' contains packages which are not compliant with t

Re: SSH never free

1999-10-02 Thread Joel Klecker
At 10:06 +1000 1999-10-02, Herbert Xu wrote: They use libssl, which begs the question why isn't libssl in non-US/non-free? Uh, because it isn't non-free? If we step into the "patents make something non-free" trap, then we probably have a lot of things in main that should be moved to non-free beca

Re: SSH never free

1999-10-02 Thread Herbert Xu
Jason Gunthorpe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 1 Oct 1999, James Troup wrote: >> [ RSA is no longer included. ] > Wait wait, doesn't this mean that ssh RSA authentication is gone as well?? > Did they replace it with DSS/DH or what? IMHO ssh would cease to be very > usefull as a security tool wi

Re: SSH never free

1999-10-01 Thread Ryan Murray
On Fri, Oct 01, 1999 at 05:39:12PM -0400, Ben Collins wrote: > On Fri, Oct 01, 1999 at 02:16:03PM -0700, Ryan Murray wrote: > > > restrictive); see below for details. > > > > > > [ RSA is no longer included. ] > > > [ IDEA is no longer included. ] > > > > IDEA was the only part of ssh that made i

Re: SSH never free

1999-10-01 Thread Sean 'Shaleh' Perry
On 01-Oct-99 Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > > On 1 Oct 1999, James Troup wrote: > >> [ RSA is no longer included. ] > > Wait wait, doesn't this mean that ssh RSA authentication is gone as well?? > Did they replace it with DSS/DH or what? IMHO ssh would cease to be very > usefull as a security tool wi

Re: SSH never free

1999-10-01 Thread Ben Collins
On Fri, Oct 01, 1999 at 02:16:03PM -0700, Ryan Murray wrote: > > restrictive); see below for details. > > > > [ RSA is no longer included. ] > > [ IDEA is no longer included. ] > > IDEA was the only part of ssh that made it non-free, prohibiting > commercial use. Wrong, RSA makes it non-free, an

Re: SSH never free

1999-10-01 Thread Jason Gunthorpe
On 1 Oct 1999, James Troup wrote: > [ RSA is no longer included. ] Wait wait, doesn't this mean that ssh RSA authentication is gone as well?? Did they replace it with DSS/DH or what? IMHO ssh would cease to be very usefull as a security tool without a public key mechism, not to mention that exis

Re: SSH never free

1999-10-01 Thread Ryan Murray
On Fri, Oct 01, 1999 at 09:52:42PM +0100, James Troup wrote: > > I am pretty sure that SSH was never free software. Could you show > > me the license on the version that they started with? > > -&<-&<-&<-&<-&< > This file is part of the

Re: SSH never free

1999-10-01 Thread James Troup
Richard Stallman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I am pretty sure that SSH was never free software. Could you show > me the license on the version that they started with? -&<-&<-&<-&<-&< This file is part of the ssh software, Copyright (c