People here are apparently unfamiliar with the technical
assistance provisions in the US export regs. I am still pursuing my
export attorney leads in order to get for the group some guidelines
regarding accepting submissions from US persons. I am quite certain
that these guidelines will bar acceptance of contributions similar to
Jeffrey's, as every export lawyer I know would claim that Jeffrey's
post was export restricted.
> Anonymous wrote:
> >
> > Jeffrey Altman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> > > These changes make it easier to configure OpenSSL on Windows.
> > >
> > > crypto/x509/x509_def.c:
> > > 67c68,71
> > > ...
> >
> > Jeff has stated on the mailing list that he's a U.S. citizen.
> > What happens now? The changes have been submitted by a U.S. person.
> > Is it verboten to put them in? Or do they have to be provably
> > independently discovered? Hmm... a denial of service attack against
> > open source.
>
> The changes were not to crypto source, so I don't believe there is any
> problem with them.
>
> If someone were to post patches that are thought to be unexportable,
> well, I guess they'd have to be re-engineered. I hope no-one does that.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Ben.
>
> --
> http://www.apache-ssl.org/ben.html
>
> "My grandfather once told me that there are two kinds of people: those
> who work and those who take the credit. He told me to try to be in the
> first group; there was less competition there."
> - Indira Gandhi
> ______________________________________________________________________
> OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
> Development Mailing List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Automated List Manager [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
--
Sameer Parekh Voice: 510-986-8770
FAX: 510-986-8777
C2Net
http://www.c2.net/ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
______________________________________________________________________
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
Development Mailing List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Automated List Manager [EMAIL PROTECTED]
