From owner-freebsd-audit Thu Jan 13 11:37:23 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-audit@freebsd.org Received: from gratis.grondar.za (gratis.grondar.za [196.7.18.133]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 005F11560D for ; Thu, 13 Jan 2000 11:37:03 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from mark@grondar.za) Received: from grondar.za (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by gratis.grondar.za (8.10.0.Beta6/8.10.0.Beta6) with ESMTP id e0DJagw71253; Thu, 13 Jan 2000 21:36:47 +0200 (SAST) Message-Id: <200001131936.e0DJagw71253@gratis.grondar.za> To: "Jordan K. Hubbard" Cc: audit@freebsd.org Subject: Re: We need to do an audit of our "crypto", both current and planned. References: <39393.947786197@zippy.cdrom.com> In-Reply-To: <39393.947786197@zippy.cdrom.com> ; from "Jordan K. Hubbard" "Thu, 13 Jan 2000 09:56:37 PST." Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2000 21:36:38 +0200 From: Mark Murray Sender: owner-freebsd-audit@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > > I'm nervous ("paranoid") that "declared" code is somehow set in stone, > > er, red tape, and needs to be "re-declared" after any change. > > I appreciate this, but I certainly don't see anything in the agreement > so far which implies this, and I would expect some far more vocal and > far richer open source players to scream blue murder over this if it > were a one-off deal on the declaration. Everyone involved has got to > know that the code changes too rapidly to make any other approach > practical. Rapid change is something that us "open-sourcers" understand well. Congresscritters understand dusty tomes sitting on shelves with no changes. As long as change is somewhere written for the lawman to see, I reckon I'm happy :-) M -- Mark Murray Join the anti-SPAM movement: http://www.cauce.org To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-audit" in the body of the message