>As I keep saying, this is not my concern, it is the potential
>restriction on _future_ use of OpenSSL by U.S. citizens that concerns
>me.
Could you please explain this? Are you saying that new rules might say
"and if it had any US source it's doulby-illegal?" I just don't
understand at all how currently-legal actions might affect future rules.
>Please support that claim (saying that the consitution prevents past
>acts from being made illegal does not support it).
Mr. Altman quoted the section. Or were you looking for something more?
>We _have_ listened to Cindy Cohn. She supports my views. I am in the
>process of getting even more comprehensive advice from her for the ASF.
>Regrettably, it still looks like we have a problem.
I find it hard to believe that Ms. Cohn really concurs with what you
wrote above. I must not be understanding it at all. Could you
please explain a bit more? Thanks.
>Like I say, I'd be happy to hear what Intel have to say, I'm just not
>entirely clear what the value of that opinion would be if it radically
>disagrees with other advice, but let's hear it before we go off
>half-cocked.
Good. Keep in mind that Intel is doing this within the context of a
worldwide opensource release of their CDSA crypto toolkit. They
definitely checked things out, have a great license (esp in regards to
the crypto export issue :), and some hardcore export resources.
They'll be in touch, or speaking up here, soon.
>unlikely, but I also think that OpenSSL is too valuable to risk in this
>way.
Again, I (and apparently Mr. Atlman too :) am clearly just too think to see
the risk. Thanks -- appreciate your forebearance of another explanation.
/r$
PS: If anyone cares, I'm out on vacation next week, not being rude or
letting this [or other] topic drop.
______________________________________________________________________
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
Development Mailing List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Automated List Manager [EMAIL PROTECTED]
