Re: Crypto and US - the time is nigh

2000-05-18 Thread Brian May
> "Ben" == Ben Collins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Ben> On Mon, May 15, 2000 at 12:45:46PM -0400, Richard A Nelson Ben> wrote: >> I just realized that the sendmail update I made this weekend >> 8.11.0.Beta1 should probably be removed from its home in >> US/Extra/Mail becaus

Re: fetchmail-ssl (was: Re: Crypto and US - the time is nigh)

2000-05-17 Thread Julian Gilbey
On Tue, May 16, 2000 at 10:28:43AM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote: > On May 16, Julian Gilbey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >I'll make a fetchmail-ssl package if noone else wants to; I'm using a > >locally compiled copy myself right now. > Look at the dlopen trick I implemented for the mutt woody pa

Re: fetchmail-ssl (was: Re: Crypto and US - the time is nigh)

2000-05-16 Thread Marco d'Itri
On May 16, Julian Gilbey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >I'll make a fetchmail-ssl package if noone else wants to; I'm using a >locally compiled copy myself right now. Look at the dlopen trick I implemented for the mutt woody package. -- ciao, Marco

Re: Crypto and US - the time is nigh

2000-05-15 Thread Marco d'Itri
On May 15, Richard A Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >But, yes, 8.11.0.Beta1 *IS* linked against libssl09 ;-{ This is bad, because then the sendmail package depends on something outside main. (mutt does not.) -- ciao, Marco

fetchmail-ssl (was: Re: Crypto and US - the time is nigh)

2000-05-15 Thread Julian Gilbey
On Mon, May 15, 2000 at 12:45:46PM -0400, Richard A Nelson wrote: > What is the current policy wrt crypto and US? and if there isn't one, > what should be done with sendmail (and others - fetchmail *SHOULD* be > compiled with SSL feature, but isn't). I'll make a fetchmail-ssl package if noone els

Re: Crypto and US - the time is nigh

2000-05-15 Thread Marco d'Itri
On May 15, Richard A Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >I just realized that the sendmail update I made this weekend >8.11.0.Beta1 should probably be removed from its home in US/Extra/Mail >because the source (and binary) has hooks for SASL and TLS. Mutt >= 1.1 has TLS and Kerberos hooks too.

Re: Crypto and US - the time is nigh

2000-05-15 Thread Richard A Nelson
On Mon, 15 May 2000, Ben Collins wrote: > SASL is not regarded as cryptography. It is merely a module layer, and has > no real crypto of it's own. IIRC, the libcyrus-sasl in woody does not > contain any crypto modules. AFA TLS, did you link against libssl09? If > not, you have nothing to worry abo

Re: Crypto and US - the time is nigh

2000-05-15 Thread Ben Collins
On Mon, May 15, 2000 at 12:45:46PM -0400, Richard A Nelson wrote: > I just realized that the sendmail update I made this weekend > 8.11.0.Beta1 should probably be removed from its home in US/Extra/Mail > because the source (and binary) has hooks for SASL and TLS. SASL is not regarded as cryptogra

Crypto and US - the time is nigh

2000-05-15 Thread Richard A Nelson
I just realized that the sendmail update I made this weekend 8.11.0.Beta1 should probably be removed from its home in US/Extra/Mail because the source (and binary) has hooks for SASL and TLS. Whilst operating on a caffiene deficiency, I didn't realize this would fall under the new laws... I just