I've just received the suggestion to make sure the VMS installation
scripts make the executables execute-only. The corresponding on the
Unixly side would be to give the binaries the protection 711 instead
of 755. The reason would be that on a multiuser system, lusers
wouldn't be able to copy the binaries and (in?)advertadly export them
from the US.
Personally, I find this kind of measure rather silly, especially since
libcrypto.a (or libcrypto.olb on VMS) and libssl would still have to
be readable to be usefull at all.
I'm looking for more arguments to cover my refusal to make that kind
of change. Do you have any to offer? :-)
--
Richard Levitte \ Spannv�gen 38, II \ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Redakteur@Stacken \ S-161 43 BROMMA \ T: +46-8-26 52 47
\ SWEDEN \ or +46-708-26 53 44
Procurator Odiosus Ex Infernis -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Unsolicited commercial email is subject to an archival fee of $400.
See <http://www.stacken.kth.se/~levitte/mail/> for more info.
______________________________________________________________________
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
Development Mailing List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Automated List Manager [EMAIL PROTECTED]
