From owner-freebsd-security Thu Mar 25 6:41:52 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-security@freebsd.org Received: from ns1.yes.no (ns1.yes.no [195.204.136.10]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BDEDA1512B for ; Thu, 25 Mar 1999 06:41:42 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from eivind@bitbox.follo.net) Received: from bitbox.follo.net (bitbox.follo.net [195.204.143.218]) by ns1.yes.no (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id PAA13986; Thu, 25 Mar 1999 15:41:20 +0100 (CET) Received: (from eivind@localhost) by bitbox.follo.net (8.8.8/8.8.6) id PAA59379; Thu, 25 Mar 1999 15:41:19 +0100 (MET) Date: Thu, 25 Mar 1999 15:41:19 +0100 From: Eivind Eklund To: Sheldon Hearn Cc: Mike Thompson , Matthew Dillon , Gary Gaskell , freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Kerberos vs SSH Message-ID: <19990325154118.E57330@bitbox.follo.net> References: <4.1.19990324233231.00a02e40@mail.dnai.com> <375.922364125@axl.noc.iafrica.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 0.95.1i In-Reply-To: <375.922364125@axl.noc.iafrica.com>; from Sheldon Hearn on Thu, Mar 25, 1999 at 02:15:25PM +0200 Sender: owner-freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Thu, Mar 25, 1999 at 02:15:25PM +0200, Sheldon Hearn wrote: > On Wed, 24 Mar 1999 23:41:01 PST, Mike Thompson wrote: > > I am currently looking into what the licensing costs would be > > for us to license SSH v2 for our servers. Does BEST.COM pay > > to license SSH v1 or SSH v2 for internal use? > > There are no licensing costs involved in using ssh1. This is false, for most reasonable definitions of 'use'. In particular, the use to which Mike Thompson (the original poster) said he would put the software is explicitly covered in the license for ssh (COPYING in the main ssh source directory) as needing commercial licensing from Data Fellows. Eivind. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-security" in the body of the message