Page has been updated to include Apache VCL:
http://www.apache.org/licenses/exports/index.html

On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 10:50 AM, Josh Thompson <[email protected]>
wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Sorry to be late to the conversation.  I discussed this in person but
> forgot
> to send something to the list.
>
> I agree that we need to go through this process.  I had looked at it
> several
> years ago, but thought it didn't apply to us since we were only using
> external
> cryptographic code.  However, I think I was wrong about that and that we
> should have filed something before.  This is heightened now with the
> additional encryption of database data we added for 2.5.
>
> I can go ahead and start the process.
>
> Josh
>
> On Wednesday, July 12, 2017 12:06:52 PM Andy Kurth wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 8:32 PM, Henry Schaffer <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > It looks to me than Andy's statement, "None of the VCL-proper source
> code
> > > actually does any direct encryption via mathematical or other
> functions."
> > > puts the VCL-proper source code into the latter category of "PMCs
> > > considering including cryptographic functionality within their
> > > products or *specially
> > > designing their products to use other software with cryptographic
> > > functionality* should take the following steps ..." [emphasis added]
> > > described in the Overview.
> > >
> > > I don't understand how Step 1 applies, since that's for crypto
> software.
> > > Might we be able to skip this?
> > > But Steps 2-4 look pretty straight forward and appear necessary.
> > >
> > > Will that do it?
> >
> > My understanding is that step 1 is simply to determine whether or not the
> > software is controlled by ECCN 5D002, which describes any software that
> > uses cryptography in one way or another.  I think the answer for step 1
> is
> > yes, VCL is controlled by ECCN 5D002.
> >
> > The scope of 5D002 is described in "EAR Category 5 Part 2 - Information
> > Security":
> > https://www.bis.doc.gov/index.php/documents/regulations-
> docs/federal-registe
> > r-notices/federal-register-2014/951-ccl5-pt2/file
> >
> > Pages 1 and 2 apply (up to section "A" on page 2), as well as section "D.
> > SOFTWARE" beginning on page 7.
> >
> > Section D gives a slightly expanded definition than included on the ASF
> >
> > page:
> > > Related Definitions: 5D002.a controls “software” designed or modified
> to
> > > use “cryptography” employing digital or analog techniques to ensure
> > > “information security.”
> >
> > This is exactly what VCL is "using cryptography" for.  Whether or not the
> > algorithms are in the VCL-proper source code or another imported/linked
> > product doesn't seem to be a factor.  Unfortunately, the ASF page is very
> > vague regarding this.  It does, however, seem to allude to this here:
> > https://www.apache.org/dev/crypto.html#faq-twocryptos
> >
> > To paraphrase, "Q: If a product uses AND includes 3rd-party crypto items,
> > does it require one or two notifications?  A: One notification, but list
> > both sources."  I infer from this that it's a given a notification is
> > required when using any 3rd-party crypto.
> >
> > There are some exceptions listed in EAR 5D002.  VCL doesn't seem to meet
> > all of the requirements for any that I have found although exceptions
> could
> > possibly apply to other ASF projects.  Specifically on page 2 Note 4.a.4,
> > 5D002 does ****not* *apply if:
> >
> > The primary function or set of functions is ****not** any of the
> following:
> > > 4. Networking (includes operation, administration, management and
> > > provisioning);
> >
> > I know this isn't black or white and the meaning of many of the terms
> > leaves room for interpretation, but VCL's primary function is to
> provision,
> > and it provisions certain networking aspects, so 5D002 does
> ****not***-****
> > *not** apply because of this.
> >
> > There's a note on the ASF page:
> > > Note - the regulations covering US export control laws for encryption
> were
> > > changed on June 25th 2010. This page describes the previous process
> which
> > > should be continued until an updated version has been drawn up and
> > > approved
> > > by the Apache VP Legal Affairs.
> >
> > Actually, the latest changes happened 2016-09-20.  The page also states:
> >
> > Fortunately, the TSU exception to these restrictions, EAR 740.13(e),
> >
> > > applies to cryptography of concern to the ASF.
> >
> > Part 740 is "License Exceptions":
> > https://www.bis.doc.gov/index.php/documents/regulation-docs/
> 415-part-740-lic
> > ense-exceptions/file
> > Unfortunately, 740.13(e) was redacted from the latest version (page 34):
> > > (e) [Reserved]
> >
> > What was 740.13(e) is now in 742.15(b):
> > https://www.bis.doc.gov/index.php/documents/regulation-docs/
> 416-part-742-con
> > trol-policy-ccl-based-controls/file
> >
> > (Note: 742.15 starts on page 26)
> > The changes made to 740 are explained on several legal sites.  Per the
> > following:
> > http://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=
> b6d5542e-d636-4864-843c-ac7895
> > a26450
> >
> > The DOC is revising license exception TSU and Part 742.15 of the EAR to
> >
> > > state that publicly available encryption source code classified under
> ECCN
> > > 5D002 is no longer subject to the EAR once the TSU email notification
> is
> > > sent to BIS and the ENC Encryption Request Coordinator. Part 742.15(b)
> now
> > > contains the notification requirement that was previously found within
> TSU
> > > at Part 740.13(e).
> >
> > So, to make an overly long story short and back to your point -- I think
> > yes, we did step 1 via this thread and we just need to do steps 2-4. :)
> >
> > -Andy
> >
> > > --henry
> > >
> > > On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 1:34 PM, Andy Kurth <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> > > > This thread is to discuss the pertinence of the U.S. export control
> laws
> > > > regarding cryptography described on the following page:
> > > > https://www.apache.org/dev/crypto.html
> > > >
> > > > The following seems to apply to VCL:
> > > > > PMCs considering including cryptographic functionality within their
> > > > > products or *specially designing their products to use other
> software
> > > > > with cryptographic functionality* should take the following steps
> > >
> > > before
> > >
> > > > > placing such code on any ASF server, including commits to
> subversion
> > > >
> > > > VCL has always used some cryptographic functionality and new features
> > >
> > > added
> > >
> > > > for VCL 2.5 expand the usage.  The README lists requirements of
> > > > php-openssl, openssh, openssl-devel, and xmlsec1-openssl.  The
> backend
> > > > installation scripts will install a few encryption-related modules
> and
> > >
> > > the
> > >
> > > > backend Perl code uses functions from the Crypt::OpenSSL::RSA and
> > > > others.
> > > > The frontend does the same.  Encrypted strings generated from these
> > >
> > > modules
> > >
> > > > and libraries are stored in the VCL database.  None of the VCL-proper
> > > > source code actually does any direct encryption via mathematical or
> > > > other
> > > > functions.
> > > >
> > > > I'm hoping I'm wrong, but it sounds like we should go through all of
> the
> > > > steps listed on the page and that all of this should be completed
> before
> > > > releasing VCL 2.5 so that the README includes the proper crypto
> notice.
> > > >
> > > > Please discuss...
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Andy
> > > >
> > > > PS - I think the *"before placing such code on any ASF server,
> including
> > > > commits to subversion"* part of the guidelines is irrelevant at the
> > >
> > > current
> > >
> > > > time since encryption code has been committed -- in some cases, years
> > >
> > > ago.
> > >
> > > > We'll certainly abide by this in the future once we figure out how
> > > > things
> > > > need to be handled.
> - --
> - -------------------------------
> Josh Thompson
> VCL Developer
> North Carolina State University
>
> my GPG/PGP key can be found at pgp.mit.edu
>
> All electronic mail messages in connection with State business which
> are sent to or received by this account are subject to the NC Public
> Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties.
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
> iEYEARECAAYFAlluICQACgkQV/LQcNdtPQO10ACeMTmcBSgygjZOdsY1kVv4UCAC
> 2KsAnAs2HYOTei1KsI6fldKHHGvWg+6A
> =F7ZM
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
>

Reply via email to