hi, I am working on a windows NT version of openssh. It's mostly working (ssh.exe, ssh-keygen.exe to be precise), except for some minor UI issues. however, i have a couple of questions about making the port available: 1. minor issue: My port is based on the openbsd ssh source (2.5.2). Is this acceptable, or should I base it on the portable source ? I think I know the answer to that one. If someone wants to take my diffs against base and integrate them into portable, that would be awesome, since I won't be able to get around to it for a while. 2. minor issue 2: I am currently using 2 files from a GPLed program in my port. It will take some work to remove them, but I can do so if it's not desirable to have GPLed source in an OpenSSH port. 3. THE major issue: How do I distribute this ? send diffs to the portable distribution maintainer(s) ? Since I live in the U.S, I obviously cannot make it available myself. My diffs would consist of diffs from the main source, makefiles and a library that implements compatibility routines for NT. The only part of my source that uses any cryptography is a function that calls a Crypto Provider DLL to generate a random number (I'm trying to approximae arc4_random() by using a system provider). Since this DLL provider is distributed in the system, I don't see a problem with re-distributing code that uses it. Is that a reasonable assumption w.r.t export restrictions ? (I don't think generating a random number involves encryption, but I have !clue about such things.) I'd very much like to make this available without treading on anyone's GPLed toes or having the NSA hunt me down, so please let me know what the best route to proceed would be. thanks, -amol
Hi, On Fri, 25 May 2001, Amol Deshpande wrote:> 2. minor issue 2: I am currently using 2 files from a GPLed program in > my port. It will take some work to remove them, but I can do so if > it's not desirable to have GPLed source in an OpenSSH port.Strictly no, you may NOT include it in anything but something fully GPL (which OpenSSH is not, it's under a BSD like license). Note that the case is different if the code is under LGPL, check this. However, if you wrote the (GPLed) code yourself (i.e. you own the copyright to it) you may change the license and include it under another license. Cheers, /Mats
On Fri, 25 May 2001, Amol Deshpande wrote:> hi, > > I am working on a windows NT version of openssh. It's mostly working > (ssh.exe, ssh-keygen.exe to be precise), except for some minor UI issues. > however, i have a couple of questions about making the port available: > > 1. minor issue: My port is based on the openbsd ssh source (2.5.2). Is > this acceptable, or should I base it on the portable source ? I think I > know the answer to that one. If someone wants to take my diffs against > base and integrate them into portable, that would be awesome, since I > won't be able to get around to it for a while. >If your looking to get into the portable tree. You need to provide patches based on the most recent CVS snapshot from directhit.> 2. minor issue 2: I am currently using 2 files from a GPLed program in my > port. It will take some work to remove them, but I can do so if it's not > desirable to have GPLed source in an OpenSSH port. >Depending on what those GPL functions are you may want to look at the OpenBSD CVS tree for it's equiv (if there is one).> 3. THE major issue: How do I distribute this ? send diffs to the portable > distribution maintainer(s) ? Since I live in the U.S, I obviously cannot > make it available myself. My diffs would consist of diffs from the main > source, makefiles and a library that implements compatibility routines for > NT. >I believe we are still working under the assumption that changes can occur to OpenSSH as long as they do not deal with the encryption aspect of the code. However, under the new laws (I've not had a chance to read them) this restriction could be lifted in the future. My only concern is how you ported it NT, and we currently trying to keep the differences between OpenBSD and portable down to a managable amount. - Ben
On Fri, May 25, 2001 at 07:13:03PM -0700, Amol Deshpande wrote:> 3. THE major issue: How do I distribute this ? send diffs to the portable > distribution maintainer(s) ? Since I live in the U.S, I obviously cannot > make it available myself. My diffs would consist of diffs from the main > source, makefiles and a library that implements compatibility routines for > NT.This is simply not true anymore. Put it on a webpage, send email to the mailing list announcing your patches and Cc: a copy to crypt at bxa.doc.gov. That is considered legally sufficient by the BXA itself. -- David Terrell | "We must go forward, not backwards; upwards, Nebcorp Prime Minister | not forwards; and always twirling, twirling, dbt at meat.net | twirling towards freedom!" http://wwn.nebcorp.com/ | - The Simpsons