On Sun, May 06, 2001 at 02:34:41AM +0200, Carlos Prados wrote: > Hi, > > I'm packaging POC from http://poc.crackinghacking.de/ > > The program is distributed under GPL, but I have observed several > irregularities, and so I wanted to ask wheter it's DFSG compliant or not: > > * It includes and statically links sha2.c from > http://www.aarongifford.com/computers/sha.html, which is BSD licensed > (without advertising clause). I think they are compatible but I'm not > sure. If by "BSD without advertising clause" you mean this: ftp://ftp.cs.berkeley.edu/pub/4bsd/README.Impt.License.Change Then, yes; it's GPL-compatible. > * It copies sources blowfish.c, and rijndael.c from gnupg (also GPL) which > have been lightly modified to remove some unneeded funtions and some > datatypes. The problem is that the author has replaced the Copyright > holder notice with it's own. That sounds like a copyright violation. Given that, as you noted, the original sources were GPL'ed in the first, I can't imagine why anyone felt a need to change the copyright notice. > Also I'm not sure wheter the cyphering algorithms blowfish and > rijndael (aes) force the program to go to non-US or it can be put into > main. Neither of them are subject to patents in the US, so the only issue on point is whether the Bush administration feels like free software crypto expert is something worth sodomizing US citizens over. Erm, perhaps I shouldn't bitch about my government that given that I'm planning on vacationing outside the country later this month. *sigh* -- G. Branden Robinson | Suffer before God and ye shall be Debian GNU/Linux | redeemed. God loves us, so He makes us branden@debian.org | suffer Christianity. http://www.debian.org/~branden/ | -- Aaron Dunsmore
Attachment:
pgpKgIZlgLBgO.pgp
Description: PGP signature