NEW processing and crypto notification (was: Re: Question for candidate Towns)
On Saturday 05 March 2005 10:59, Sven Luther wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 01:55:25PM -0800, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > Sven Luther wrote:
> > >I have some real trouble with the fact that all the work i do for debian
> > > is reported to the US secret services or whatever by the ftp-masters
> > > and our archive handling services, and i certainly did *NOT* agree to
> > > this being the
> > >case.
> >
> > Everyone subscribed to debian-devel-changes gets notified of every
> > change you make; and we certainly welcome everyone to subscribe to that,
> > including the US export bureau or secret service. That we happen to
> > provide a slightly briefer summary for the BXA doesn't really change
> > that in any way. In fact, the summary excludes the names of package
> > maintainers as well as other information that gets posted to
> > -devel-changes.
>
> Yeah, ok, but then how does this interact with automated NEW processing for
> not-really-NEW packages ?
As ajt said in http://lists.debian.org/debian-vote/2005/03/msg00104.html:
| It's not a technical issue it's a legal one -- our approach to satisfying
| the legal requirements for including crypto software in main require us to
| manually process each package with a new name. Yes, it really is necessary.
Searching through my d-d-a archive I found:
http://www.debian.org/legal/cryptoinmain
Somewhere in the middle of the document it details, that a written notice _on
paper_ has to be sent to the NSA.
But instead of rehashing well known points, Sven could compile a public(!)
list of packages needing processing from
http://ftp-master.debian.org/new.html with explanations and pointers why
which action should be taken on them. I am sure, a research robot (like
Martin Schulze for stable point releases) would be able to add valuable input
to NEW processing.
Regards, David
--
- hallo... wie gehts heute?
- *hust* gut *rotz* *keuch*
- gott sei dank kommunizieren wir über ein septisches medium ;)
-- Matthias Leeb, Uni f. angewandte Kunst, 2005-02-15
Reply to: