On Sat, 28 Feb 2004, Lionel Elie Mamane wrote:
[pgp5]
> Besides, the Unix has a bug in the way it
> reads /dev/random that make keys generated by it non-secure.
I think that bug has been fixed in 5.0-6:
* Reading from /dev/random now really produces random data.
Fi
On Sat, Feb 28, 2004 at 02:49:20PM +0100, Lionel Elie Mamane wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 28, 2004 at 09:18:03AM +, Ian Beckwith wrote:
> > If I understand things correctly, their licenses would permit the
> > move (ie meet the EAR requirements) , and in the case of rsaref2 and
> > pgp5i, the only thi
On Sat, Feb 28, 2004 at 09:18:03AM +, Ian Beckwith wrote:
> If I understand things correctly, their licenses would permit the
> move (ie meet the EAR requirements) , and in the case of rsaref2 and
> pgp5i, the only thing holding them in non-us is the RSA patent,
> which I believe expired in Se
* Ian Beckwith ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [040228 10:25]:
> If I understand things correctly, their licenses would permit the move
> (ie meet the EAR requirements) , and in the case of rsaref2 and pgp5i,
> the only thing holding them in non-us is the RSA patent, which I
> believe expired in September 2000
Hello.
A month ago, I raised the question of whether the packages in
non-us/non-free could move to non-free. The discussion died out
before there was any consensus, so I'm raising it again.
There are two packages in non-us/non-free, pgp5i and rsaref2. ckermit,
which I am adopting, would also need
On Sun, Feb 01, 2004 at 10:47:45PM -0800, Ben Reser wrote:
> The TSU license exception is defined in §740.13 of the EAR which
> references §734.3(b)(3) and further references §734.7 and §734.10 which
> does not use the term public domain. Nor does it require that the
> software not have usage rest
On Sun, Feb 01, 2004 at 10:47:45PM -0800, Ben Reser wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 01, 2004 at 10:14:30PM +, Brian M. Carlson wrote:
> > non-US/non-free. crypto-in-main is crypto-in-*main*, not
> > crypto-in-non-free. That's part of the reason why we still have non-US.
>
On Sun, Feb 01, 2004 at 10:14:30PM +, Brian M. Carlson wrote:
> non-US/non-free. crypto-in-main is crypto-in-*main*, not
> crypto-in-non-free. That's part of the reason why we still have non-US.
> This is due to some restrictions with the definition of "public domain&quo
On Sat, Jan 31, 2004 at 01:02:17PM +, Ian Beckwith wrote:
> Hello.
>
> What is the policy on crypto in non-free?
>
> The initial crypto-in-main announcement excluded non-free.
> Is that still the case?
Yes.
> I am packaging the latest ckermit, and I have enabled crypt
Hello.
What is the policy on crypto in non-free?
The initial crypto-in-main announcement excluded non-free.
Is that still the case?
I am packaging the latest ckermit, and I have enabled crypto support
(kerberos 4 & 5, openssl, TLS, DES, CAST and support for an external
ssh client). I faile
10 matches
Mail list logo
