Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> 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? :-)
The US government can #!%@ off, I'm in sweden? :)
It would be silly to make this kind of change in the distribution. If you
are lucky enough to not be in the united states, then this type of
installation 'restriction' would be a hindrance. If someone in the US is
so paranoid they feel these changes are warranted, they can make the
changes themselves.
And unless things have changed since the last time I checked, the majority
of people on the planet are lucky enough to be outside the united
states. :)
-Bill P.
______________________________________________________________________
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
Development Mailing List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Automated List Manager [EMAIL PROTECTED]
