Re: moving mutt-i from non-us to main
Bart Schuller writes: Has anything changed since then, or do we have a too short collective memory? I had always assumed that everything in non-us contained encryption code, as do the few things in it that I have actually used. -- John HaslerThis posting is in the public domain. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Do with it what you will. Dancing Horse Hill Make money from it if you can; I don't mind. Elmwood, Wisconsin Do not send email advertisements to this address.
Re: moving mutt-i from non-us to main
On 15-Oct-98, 18:02 (CDT), [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Marc Singer writes: I was under the impression that putting hooks in to use crypto was enough to raise the hackles of the export hounds. Standing near the border and thinking about prime numbers is enough to raise the hackles of the export kooks. Ihere has got to be some limit to the amount of crap we'll take from these jerks. Ignore the nonsense about 'hooks' and ship it. While I agree in principle, you might want to ask Michael Elkins first; it's conceivable that he could be brought into any litigation (on the let's accuse everyone whose name we can find anywhere near it theory). This came up a lot when I was reading the mutt lists (back in the 0.4x era), and IIRC Michael was very concerned about being charged with a crypto violation, not because he believed he was guilty, but because simply having to defend himself legally would pretty much ruin him financially. Whether we agree or not, I think we should respect the author's wishes (as we did when we pulled the MP3 thingie (8hz?)). Steve Greenland
Re: moving mutt-i from non-us to main
Steve Greenland writes: While I agree in principle, you might want to ask Michael Elkins first; it's conceivable that he could be brought into any litigation I didn't realize that the author of mutt-i was a US resident (I don't use mutt at all, myself). ...simply having to defend himself legally would pretty much ruin him financially. I think he'd find people standing line to defend him for free. I think we should respect the author's wishes... Yes. Perhaps we should ask what they are? -- John Hasler [EMAIL PROTECTED] (John Hasler) Dancing Horse Hill Elmwood, WI
Re: moving mutt-i from non-us to main
On Fri, Oct 16, 1998 at 08:38:57PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Steve Greenland writes: While I agree in principle, you might want to ask Michael Elkins first; it's conceivable that he could be brought into any litigation I didn't realize that the author of mutt-i was a US resident (I don't use mutt at all, myself). He isn't. ME no longer does the mutt-i patches; they are maintained in Germany. Dan
Re: moving mutt-i from non-us to main
On Fri, 16 October 1998 20:38:57 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I didn't realize that the author of mutt-i was a US resident (I don't use mutt at all, myself). Some time ago (can't remember any version numbers) the PGP version was hacked by Thomas Roessler [EMAIL PROTECTED] right after the normal version came out. Right now Michael Elkins has a job enslaving (sp?) him to use a Mickeysoft OS any he doesn't have the time for much of the former codings any more. Thomas Roessler is the keeper of the source at the moment. Perhaps Roland Rosenfeld can ask him what he thinks of it? Alexander -- The creatures outside looked from pig to man, and from man to pig, and from pig to man again: but already it was impossible to say which was which (George Orwell, The Animal Farm, very last sentence) Alexander Koch - - aka Efraim - PGP - 0xE7694969 - Hannover - Germany
Re: moving mutt-i from non-us to main
Alexander Koch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Some time ago (can't remember any version numbers) the PGP version was hacked by Thomas Roessler [EMAIL PROTECTED] right after the normal version came out. Right now Michael Elkins has a job enslaving (sp?) him to use a Mickeysoft OS any he doesn't have the time for much of the former codings any more. Thomas Roessler is the keeper of the source at the moment. I don't understand, what the Author (Michael Elkins) or the current Maintainer of the upstream version (Thomas Roessler) have to do with us (Debian) offering their program on our US ftp servers. IMHO only those people are responsible for export from US to the free world, who put it on the FTP servers without restriction. So if a Debian mutt in main is illegal according to US law, than Debian (or the owner of the FTP servers) are responsible, not the author of the program. It's another question, whether exporting a program, with simply calls pgp (and parses the PGP keyring), breaks the US exporting laws. When we mean, that this is illegal, we should move dpkg-buildpackage to non-US, because this calls pgp, too... Tscho Roland -- * Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Fido: 2:2450/42 * PGP: 1024/DD08DD6D 2D E7 CC DE D5 8D 78 BE 3C A0 A4 F1 4B 09 CE AF
Re: moving mutt-i from non-us to main
Roland writes: I don't understand, what the Author (Michael Elkins) ... Mr. Elkins should be innocent even by the standards of the anti-encryption kooks as long as he had nothing to do with the installation of the encryption hooks. ...or the current Maintainer of the upstream version (Thomas Roessler) have to do with us (Debian) offering their program on our US ftp servers. IMHO only those people are responsible for export from US to the free world, who put it on the FTP servers without restriction. -- John Hasler [EMAIL PROTECTED] (John Hasler) Dancing Horse Hill Elmwood, WI
Re: moving mutt-i from non-us to main
Hi Roland. On Sat, 17 October 1998 10:36:48 +, Roland Rosenfeld wrote: I don't understand, what the Author (Michael Elkins) or the current Maintainer of the upstream version (Thomas Roessler) have to do with us (Debian) offering their program on our US ftp servers. I meant it'd be nice to ask them... nothing more. ,-)) And if they would (have) object(ed), that should have a certain .. influence on the decision besides *any* export and crypto stuff. When we mean, that this is illegal, we should move dpkg-buildpackage to non-US, because this calls pgp, too... *grin* Your point. Alexander -- The creatures outside looked from pig to man, and from man to pig, and from pig to man again: but already it was impossible to say which was which (George Orwell, The Animal Farm, very last sentence) Alexander Koch - - aka Efraim - PGP - 0xE7694969 - Hannover - Germany
Re: moving mutt-i from non-us to main
People, The fact that there even exist two debian versions of mutt should tell you that it was an issue for people. Looking through the changelogs, I see that mutt was moved to non-US in Feb. 1997: mutt (0.61.1-1) unstable; urgency=low * New upstream release. * Now non-US. (Bug #7257) -- J.H.M. Dassen [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue, 11 Feb 1997 14:15:27 +0100 Has anything changed since then, or do we have a too short collective memory? -- The idea is that the first face shown to people is one they can readily accept - a more traditional logo. The lunacy element is only revealed subsequently, via the LunaDude. [excerpted from the Lunatech Identity Manual]
Re: moving mutt-i from non-us to main
On Sat, Oct 17, 1998 at 09:55:48PM +0200, Bart Schuller wrote: People, The fact that there even exist two debian versions of mutt should tell you that it was an issue for people. Looking through the changelogs, I see that mutt was moved to non-US in Feb. 1997: mutt (0.61.1-1) unstable; urgency=low * New upstream release. * Now non-US. (Bug #7257) -- J.H.M. Dassen [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue, 11 Feb 1997 14:15:27 +0100 Has anything changed since then, or do we have a too short collective memory? The bug was filed probably because it seemed likely that it was the easiest and safest course. Some of us in the world (or at least in the US) believe we should have taken a stand long ago. There is no crypto hook in mutt that does not exist in bash or worse, in perl which can also read PGP key files just like mutt can. Are they non-us too? pgp6Sz5QLgeHH.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: moving mutt-i from non-us to main
Marc Singer writes: I was under the impression that putting hooks in to use crypto was enough to raise the hackles of the export hounds. Standing near the border and thinking about prime numbers is enough to raise the hackles of the export kooks. Ihere has got to be some limit to the amount of crap we'll take from these jerks. Ignore the nonsense about 'hooks' and ship it. -- John HaslerThis posting is in the public domain. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Do with it what you will. Dancing Horse Hill Make money from it if you can; I don't mind. Elmwood, Wisconsin Do not send email advertisements to this address.
Re: moving mutt-i from non-us to main
On Thu, Oct 15, 1998 at 06:02:28PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I was under the impression that putting hooks in to use crypto was enough to raise the hackles of the export hounds. Standing near the border and thinking about prime numbers is enough to raise the hackles of the export kooks. Ihere has got to be some limit to the amount of crap we'll take from these jerks. Ignore the nonsense about 'hooks' and ship it. applause pgpA3Ib8PDnrD.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: moving mutt-i from non-us to main
On Thu, Oct 15, 1998 at 06:55:36PM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote: Can I move mutt-i from non-us to main? There is no crypto code in the package, only SHA-1 (hash algorithm) and code to run pgp or gnupg. (Waiting to resolve this issue I haven't uploaded yet the stripped version to main, I hope Brian will let it slip past the freeze, there are no other differences from the complete version.) I was under the impression that putting hooks in to use crypto was enough to raise the hackles of the export hounds.
Re: moving mutt-i from non-us to main
On Thu, Oct 15, 1998 at 02:14:20PM -0700, Marc Singer wrote: Can I move mutt-i from non-us to main? There is no crypto code in the package, only SHA-1 (hash algorithm) and code to run pgp or gnupg. (Waiting to resolve this issue I haven't uploaded yet the stripped version to main, I hope Brian will let it slip past the freeze, there are no other differences from the complete version.) I was under the impression that putting hooks in to use crypto was enough to raise the hackles of the export hounds. Well geez, time to move bash to non-free, it has built-in hooks to run crypto. mutt-i can also grok pgp keyrings for key selection and the like. It probably does the same with gpg keyrings (old format I imagine, not sure if the new format is yet supported) though that's not illegal either. pgpfl3Okdofy3.pgp Description: PGP signature
