Date: Fri, 6 Aug 2004 22:49:38 +0200 From: Wilko Bulte <wb@freebie.xs4all.nl> To: Paul Richards <paul@originative.co.uk> Cc: cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/bin/ed Makefile src/gnu/usr.bin/cvs/cvs Makefile src/kerberos5 Makefile.inc src/lib/libfetch Makefile src/lib/libpam/libpam Makefile src/lib/libpam/modules/pam_krb5 Makefile src/lib/libpam/modules/pam_ksu Makefile ... Message-ID: <20040806204938.GA38521@freebie.xs4all.nl> In-Reply-To: <1091823800.17455.9.camel@myrddin> References: <200408060727.i767R87w004556@repoman.freebsd.org> <1091818349.17455.2.camel@myrddin> <6.1.0.6.1.20040806122530.03d6cb40@popserver.sfu.ca> <1091823800.17455.9.camel@myrddin>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, Aug 06, 2004 at 09:23:20PM +0100, Paul Richards wrote.. > On Fri, 2004-08-06 at 20:36, Colin Percival wrote: > > At 11:52 06/08/2004, Paul Richards wrote: > > >On Fri, 2004-08-06 at 08:27, Colin Percival wrote: > > >> Join the 21st century: Cryptography is no longer an optional component > > >> of releases. > > >This might not be as dead an issue as people think. From information > > >I've received recently it seems that exporting crypto from the UK now > > >requires an export license. > > > > When I asked DTI about crypto a couple years ago, their response > > was "it's open source? In that case, go right ahead". Of course, the > > usual caveats about not exporting to embargoed countries and not > > assisting in the production of WMD still apply, but those restrictions > > would apply regardless of whether we ship cryptographic binaries. > > In this case it wasn't open source, it was a commercial product that had > FreeBSD in it, specifically it was "tangible" and that's significant > when interpreting the export rules. And that is something that the commercial exporter has to address, right? -- Wilko Bulte wilko@FreeBSD.org
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040806204938.GA38521>