I don't think it has, but feel free to move it off the list
and into personal e-mail if you want.
> (A) This issue has nothing to do with law. It's US Regulations
> that are the issue. Regulations can be changed at a whim (and
> this year, encryption is not a munitions issue but a commerce
> issue).
I'm not a lawyer. Laws and regulations are for my purposes
the same - breaking them can have dire consequences.
> (B) The regulations are totally ambiguous.
<sigh> no kidding. Just like the CIA web pages (not a joke)
> You might argue that linux is an encryption item. If so, you're
> full of shit. http://www.eff.org/bernstein/Legal/961206.decision
> for an example of what might happen if this ever goes to court.
My stand is simple - Linux has encryption hooks in it _NOW_ (v2.1.36)
and I want to remove them. I also want to add support for things
like loadable loop compressors (like PPP has BSD compression module).
I want the results of this to be freely distributable.
BTW, I'm about 90% finished the kernel code. I've documented the entire
driver too, and have been looking for a possible race bug. I've finished
the first module for the transformation "none", and will do one for XOR
for kernel distribution (it is a good example of how to pass data to
a transformation module). I'll have to patch both "mount" and "losetup"
too before the kernel patch is practical though.
-- Andrew E. Mileski mailto:aem@netcom.ca Linux Plug-and-Play Hardware Support http://www.redhat.com/linux-info/pnp/ XFree86 Matrox Team http://www.bf.rmit.edu.au/~ajv/xf86-matrox.html