From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/56305 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Jesper Harder Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: Re: Crypto problems again Date: Fri, 06 Feb 2004 01:53:58 +0100 Sender: ding-owner@lists.math.uh.edu Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: deer.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1076029095 831 80.91.224.253 (6 Feb 2004 00:58:15 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 6 Feb 2004 00:58:15 +0000 (UTC) Original-X-From: ding-owner+M4845@lists.math.uh.edu Fri Feb 06 01:58:08 2004 Return-path: Original-Received: from malifon.math.uh.edu ([129.7.128.13]) by deer.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1AouJs-0002w2-00 for ; Fri, 06 Feb 2004 01:58:08 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.math.uh.edu) by malifon.math.uh.edu with smtp (Exim 3.20 #1) id 1AouJg-0000VJ-00; Thu, 05 Feb 2004 18:57:56 -0600 Original-Received: from justine.libertine.org ([66.139.78.221] ident=postfix) by malifon.math.uh.edu with esmtp (Exim 3.20 #1) id 1AouJZ-0000VD-00 for ding@lists.math.uh.edu; Thu, 05 Feb 2004 18:57:49 -0600 Original-Received: from pfepb.post.tele.dk (pfepb.post.tele.dk [195.41.46.236]) by justine.libertine.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 47B7B3A021B for ; Thu, 5 Feb 2004 18:57:48 -0600 (CST) Original-Received: from [195.249.130.91] (0xc3f9825b.esnxr3.ras.tele.dk [195.249.130.91]) by pfepb.post.tele.dk (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1D2965EE12A for ; Fri, 6 Feb 2004 01:57:46 +0100 (CET) Original-To: ding@gnus.org Mail-Followup-To: ding@gnus.org In-Reply-To: (Simon Josefsson's message of "Thu, 05 Feb 2004 21:53:18 +0100") User-Agent: Gnus/5.110002 (No Gnus v0.2) Emacs/21.3.50 (gnu/linux) Precedence: bulk Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:56305 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.gnus.general:56305 Simon Josefsson writes: > Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen writes: > >> I will explain how I understand the matter. However, why ask me when >> you can learn from experts? There must be web sites that explain this >> issue in detail. I don't know which sites, but you can find them more >> easily than I can. > > Anyone? Preferably authoritative information from a governmental > department or so. ,----[ http://www.bxa.doc.gov/Encryption/EncFactSheet6_17_02.html ] | | no review or notification is required to export or reexport the | following: [...] | | 3. Items with limited use of cryptography, such as for | authentication, digital signature, execution of copy protected | software [...] `---- So authentication should be fine (and ditto for signatures).