From: terry@cs.weber.edu (A Wizard of Earth C)
Subject: Re: Could the passwd/crypt changes be included in the patch kit?
Organization: Weber State University  (Ogden, UT)
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 92 01:47:29 GMT

In article <1992Oct7.161805.21244@rwwa.COM> witr@rwwa.com writes:
>In article <1992Oct6.152823.3185@sci34hub.sci.com>,
>  gary@sci34hub.sci.com (Gary Heston) writes:
>
>| The only bypass is for someone outside
>| the US to write the code, and make it available on a ftp site also outside
>| the country. 
>
>So then, if there were a patch that included a dummy module with comments
>pointing to such a place, a patch could be distributed, right?
>
>So, Terry?  Want to include this in the next Patchkit Beta?

Can't.  Someone might ftp it from outside the US.

The soloution is for someone (probably the Jolitz's, but maybe CSRG?) to get
an export license.  I doubt that the cryptographic software will be off the
munitions list any time soon.

I'll look into getting a license myself, but I doubt that anonymous FTP will
be an allowable distribution mechanism even if I had one, nor would a news
posting.

I have patch production software which could be used outside the US to
build a patch using a working crypt library module, and as long as it was
never downloaded from the Us to outside the US there wouldn't be a problem
...but, of course, that couldn't be guaranteed, and would probably result
in federal problems for various FTP archive operators in the US.

I really don't see how a non export/non-postal soloution could work within
the scope of a license.

Tell you what, Robert:  You get a license and find the sources somewhere,
and I'll email you the patch production software and get a number and an
application ordering worked out with Nathan and send you a patch number
to use.  8-).

I don't think crypt is that big an issue; the way passwording is currently
done, the machine is basically at the same security state for it's users
as it would be in a vouchsafe environment:  The accounts contents are as
safe as the root user on the machine.  Only root can get in, and you pretty
much have to trust root.  Anyone who can get root can do anything they want
to your files without needing to look at your password.

The only caveat here is people who don't pick different passwords for
different authentication domains may have their password on a 386BSD box
root on that box access to their accounts on other machines.  Picking
different passwords is easy to do, and a 386BSD box is never in the same
authentication domain as any other box (even another 386BSD box) since
there is no NIS ("yp") for 386BSD yet.  Even if they were, it would require
the addition of a crypt to 386BSD to use the "pushed" user databases.

The best approach as a user is to make sure you trust root, but then you
should do that on any machine.


					Terry Lambert
					terry@icarus.weber.edu
					terry_lambert@novell.com
---
Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present
or previous employers.
-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                        "I have an 8 user poetic license" - me
 Get the 386bsd FAQ from agate.berkeley.edu:/pub/386BSD/386bsd-0.1/unofficial
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd,comp.unix.ultrix,comp.unix.solaris