Re: Compiling OpenSSL without 3DES

1999-11-15 Thread Bruno Treguier
> But then, can't you just compile everything as normal, and > change the allowed ciphersuites in the configuration..? It surely can't > be illegal to compile the 3DES in, but simply not use it. In fact, that's what I'll plead for, if there is no other simple solution. It may even get acce

Re: Compiling OpenSSL without 3DES

1999-11-15 Thread Bruno Treguier
Ben: > > Anyway, French laws aren't that specific. All they talk about is a > > "key length", so even if you're right, Ben, I don't want to get into > > trouble just because a pen pusher will have made the wrong assumption. > > ;-) > > That's up to you, but I don't know _anyone_ who thinks that

Re: Compiling OpenSSL without 3DES

1999-11-12 Thread Bruno Treguier
Ben: > Is that true keylength or effective keylength? 3DES has an effective > keylength of 112 bits. Well, first of all I have to present my apologies to the list for my double posting the other day. Seems that I slipped on the "send" key before finalizing my message... Now, about the effective

Re: OpenSSL status in France

1999-07-08 Thread Bruno Treguier
Thanks for all your answers about the status of OpenSSL in France. I do agree with you as well, when you say that it's up to the end user to deal with the paperwork (but as I'm not less lazy than Joe Average, I wondered if it could be avoided ! ;-) ). Furthermore, from what I've understood, the d