Date: Wed, 9 Aug 2000 18:45:30 -0700 (PDT) From: asami@freebsd.org (Satoshi Asami) To: ports@freebsd.org Cc: kris@freebsd.org Subject: volunteer wanted: crypto ports Message-ID: <200008100145.SAA19404@silvia.hip.berkeley.edu>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi,
I need someone to help me on this. The issue is which ports we can
export now that BSDi has gotten a blanket export permit. If someone
can go look at the RESTRICTED=crypto ports' license files, and contact
the authors when it is not clear that we can export them, I will be
eternally grateful.
Thanks,
-PW
-------
Date: Thu, 13 Jul 2000 02:28:48 -0700 (PDT)
From: Kris Kennaway <kris@FreeBSD.org>
To: Satoshi - Ports Wraith - Asami <asami@freebsd.org>
Cc: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@zippy.osd.bsdi.com>,
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org, archie@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Export controlled ports
On 11 Jul 2000, Satoshi - Ports Wraith - Asami wrote:
> Note that I only changed rsaref's RESTRICTED from "crypto" to "patent"
> -- we still can't ship the distfile or packages due to the RSA
> patent. When the patent expires, my understanding is that we are
> going to just switch over to the international version and remove
> RESTRICTED. This also means USE_OPENSSL will still mean RESTRICTED
> (by inference) on 3-stable machines which need security/rsaref. Kris,
> is this correct?
Actually it's not just the patent, but the license on the software itself.
i.e. RSA Inc do not permit us to export the rsaref code, and we can't
currently use or export any other RSA implementations because of the
patent. Once the patent expires we still can't export rsaref (unless they
remove that license clause - unlikely, see below) - but we won't need/want
to anyway because it's crap (ports which build against it can be patched
to build against OpenSSL, which we WILL be able to distribute freely)
The gnupg-rsa and librsaintl packages should also not be built for the
same reason, but it looks like they're also okay as they stand.
Quite a few of the ports, such as (I believe) cfs, specifically mention
not exporting the code in the license agreement - this was probably as a
reminder of the then-existing regulations and the author may well agree to
remove the clause if asked, but I don't know whether we can safely assume
that condition now to be removed automatically (e.g. rsaref is probably
never going to be relicensed since RSA also sell a commercial toolkit and
seem to consider releasing rsaref to have been a mistake).
And then things like Netscape have specific disclaimers on their 128-bit
versions against exporting to the "Rogue States" (although I assume that
BSDi's export license also requires this since again it comes from the
same source, the current crypto export regs).
Kris
--
In God we Trust -- all others must submit an X.509 certificate.
-- Charles Forsythe <forsythe@alum.mit.edu>
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200008100145.SAA19404>