> That's true. But consider the steps RSA went through in order
> to get a BXA statement that BSAFE SSL-C was not covered by US export
> restrictions. They had to prove to the US government that all bits in
> their product were of non-US origin. All questionable bits either had
> to be justi
Sameer Parekh writes:
> That's true. But consider the steps RSA went through in order
> to get a BXA statement that BSAFE SSL-C was not covered by US export
> restrictions. They had to prove to the US government that all bits in
> their product were of non-US origin. All questionable bits ei
That's true. But consider the steps RSA went through in order
to get a BXA statement that BSAFE SSL-C was not covered by US export
restrictions. They had to prove to the US government that all bits in
their product were of non-US origin. All questionable bits either had
to be justified or
Ben Laurie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > What happens now? The changes have been submitted by a U.S. person.
> > Is it verboten to put them in?
> The changes were not to crypto source, so I don't believe there is any
> problem with them.
I'm not sure that makes a difference.
On the other han
Sameer Parekh writes:
> Incorporating BSAFE support into OpenSSL is an excellent idea.
>
> Incorporating Gordon's patches may be a bad idea, for reasons
> everyone should be aware of by now. (Even if they disagree with me.)
I haven't been on this mailing list earlier, so I can only g
The way out of this problem is to get from RSA a patent
license. This will allow you to use the RSA algorithims in OpenSSL
without BSAFE.
>
>
> >Gordon Chaffee has posted changes to SSLeay 0.9.0 that call BSafe for the
> >RSA algorithms. It would seem that by using this patch, even com
> Gordon Chaffee has posted changes to SSLeay 0.9.0 that call BSafe for the
> It sure would be nice if this patch got incorporated into the OpenSSL base
> as an alternative to RSAref.
This would be great. I think they both should be supported. Robert in
Alaska
__
>Gordon Chaffee has posted changes to SSLeay 0.9.0 that call BSafe for the
>RSA algorithms. It would seem that by using this patch, even commercial
>establishments within the US can be legal with respect to the RSA patent.
And I am still with a chicken-and-egg problem: I cannot use SSLeay as
Incorporating BSAFE support into OpenSSL is an excellent idea.
Incorporating Gordon's patches may be a bad idea, for reasons
everyone should be aware of by now. (Even if they disagree with me.)
>
> It sure would be nice if this patch got incorporated into the OpenSSL base
> as a
"Salter, Thomas A" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Gordon Chaffee has posted changes to SSLeay 0.9.0 that call BSafe for the
> RSA algorithms. It would seem that by using this patch, even commercial
> establishments within the US can be legal with respect to the RSA patent.
>
> http://bmrc.berkel
> Is anyone on this list knowledgeable about Entrust products? I am
> trying to figure out where they fit in the scheme of things.
What I remember from taking a quick look quite a while ago
is the Entrust Technologies mainly wants to sell you an
enforced key-escrow system. They want big bucks t
Gordon Chaffee has posted changes to SSLeay 0.9.0 that call BSafe for the
RSA algorithms. It would seem that by using this patch, even commercial
establishments within the US can be legal with respect to the RSA patent.
http://bmrc.berkeley.edu/people/chaffee/ssleay/ssleay.html
It sure would be
Sergei Khomiouk wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> Verifying certificate via X509_verify_cert() function I got call
> of my verify_callback function twise and in each case errorcode==0
> In first case I got some CA certificate, in second - certificate to check.
> Why callback calls when all Ok?
This is so t
Lutz Behnke wrote:
>
> Ed Peschko wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Feb 10, 1999 at 02:20:06PM -0700, Doug Erickson wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >> Is this right? If not, what am I missing?
> > >>
> > >
> > >http://www.patents.ibm.com/patlist?icnt=US&patent_number=4405829
> >
> > Um.. that patent has expired...
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Is anyone on this list knowledgeable about Entrust products? I am
trying to figure out where they fit in the scheme of things.
I have been looking at their web site and the products that they
advertise there. In particular, I am wondering about Entru
Hello,
Verifying certificate via X509_verify_cert() function I got call
of my verify_callback function twise and in each case errorcode==0
In first case I got some CA certificate, in second - certificate to check.
Why callback calls when all Ok?
...
doc\callback
"When ever X509_cert_verify() mak
Hello Everyone:
I'm just starting to try out SSLeay and I have small program which I'm
converting to SSL from normal sockets. Things are going like this:
Server:
SSLeay_add_ssl_algorithms() ;
ctx = SSL_CTX_new( SSLv2_server_method() ) ;
ssl = SSL_new(ctx) ;
SSL_use_RSAPrivateKey_
Niels Poppe wrote:
>
> Lutz Behnke wrote:
>
> A service provider inside the US might violate this export regulation
> while providing service to me. That does not limit my rights at the
> other side of the wire. Or am I missing something?
No you do not, you are correct. And legally the provider
>
> Hi,
>
> I have a doubt here regarding the length in bits for shared secret key
> generated using Diffie-Hellman, hope someone could kindly clear my doubt
> :)
>
> In "DH *DH_generate_parameters(int prime_len, int generator, void
> *callback, char *cb_arg)", the first argument is the length
Lutz Behnke wrote:
>
> Alan Pogrebinschi wrote:
> >
> [..]
> > PS: off topic: My company is located in Brazil and our server is in the US.
> > I never know for sure if I should use the international or U.S. versions of
> > crypto software. Anyone knows?
>
> You may use the US version on the serv
Ed Peschko wrote:
>
> On Wed, Feb 10, 1999 at 02:20:06PM -0700, Doug Erickson wrote:
> >
> >
> >> Is this right? If not, what am I missing?
> >>
> >
> >http://www.patents.ibm.com/patlist?icnt=US&patent_number=4405829
>
> Um.. that patent has expired...
According to the book by Schneier it is va
Hi,
I have a doubt here regarding the length in bits for shared secret key
generated using Diffie-Hellman, hope someone could kindly clear my doubt
:)
In "DH *DH_generate_parameters(int prime_len, int generator, void
*callback, char *cb_arg)", the first argument is the length in bits for
the pri
22 matches
Mail list logo
