| From: | Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)trust(dot)ee> |
|---|---|
| To: | Philip Warner <pjw(at)rhyme(dot)com(dot)au> |
| Cc: | "D'Arcy J(dot)M(dot) Cain" <darcy(at)druid(dot)net>, Michael(dot)Ansley(at)intec(dot)co(dot)za, maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us, tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us, scrappy(at)hub(dot)org, mha(at)sollentuna(dot)net, pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] RE: [INTERFACES] Re: SSL patch |
| Date: | 1999-07-26 22:37:51 |
| Message-ID: | 379CE33F.E2C64A66@trust.ee |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Philip Warner wrote:
>
> At 06:24 26/07/99 -0400, D'Arcy" "J.M." Cain wrote:
> >Thus spake Hannu Krosing
> >> Not to scare anyone away (I like crypto !;), but isn't it illegal to
> >> have SSL
> >> in an exportable product in US.
> >>
> >> I guess this should be kept in a separate patch distributed from an
> >> non-US site
> >> until US government wisens up.
> >
> >The PostgreSQL server is in Canada. There may still be some issues but
> >last time I checked we weren't a US state yet.
Good to hear, I was afraid of them being more or less the same
crypto-wise.
> Even if there are problems, I believe it's OK to export PostgreSQL with
> options for SSL support, so long as you don't export SSL.
Let's hope so. In US that would be a 'crypto hook' and legally as bad as
real crypto.
---------
Hannu
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jan Wieck | 1999-07-26 23:01:44 | Re: [HACKERS] plperl intial pass |
| Previous Message | Ole Gjerde | 1999-07-26 20:44:10 | UPDATE memory exhaustion |