Date: Wed, 14 Apr 1999 17:38:50 -0400 From: "Allen Smith" <easmith@beatrice.rutgers.edu> To: Brett Glass <brett@lariat.org>, "Gregory P. Smith" <greg@nas.nasa.gov> Cc: Igor Roshchin <igor@physics.uiuc.edu>, security@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: ssh protocol [was: Interesting problem: chowning files sent via FTP] Message-ID: <9904141738.ZM4166@beatrice.rutgers.edu> In-Reply-To: Brett Glass <brett@lariat.org> "Re: ssh protocol [was: Interesting problem: chowning files sent via FTP]" (Apr 12, 5:13pm) References: <Brett Glass <brett@lariat.org> <Your message of "Mon 12 Apr 1999 13:28:39 MDT." <4.2.0.32.19990412132649.043b7350@localhost> <4.2.0.32.19990412152634.00ce0bb0@localhost> <4.2.0.32.19990412160742.00c35dc0@localhost>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
On Apr 12, 5:13pm, Brett Glass (possibly) wrote: > Berkeley licensing would also allow cryptographers to review the code, > but would have the advantage that people could incorporate it not > just as a library but as an integral part of a product. Umm... Berkeley licensing means that people can review the _original_ code. It doesn't mean that people can review the code that is actually used in the product. > Also, Richard Stallman has pretty much decreed that the LGPL is > history as far as FSF and "GNU" projects are concerned. > They'll use the GPL on their libraries in an attempt to force > companies to give up their work. This will backfire, of course, > and we'll wind up with incompatible implementations. I agree that this qualifies as stupid. -Allen -- Allen Smith easmith@beatrice.rutgers.edu To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-security" in the body of the messagehelp
Want to link to this message? Use this
URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?9904141738.ZM4166>