Sign in Join

Live chat for Free Pascal, Lazarus, Delphi and every Pascal programmer.

Mailing lists / lazarus / 2012-08

(no subject)

20 messages · 8 people · –

Reply by email Subscribe to this list Your subscription

Read-only archive. Use j and k to move between messages.

Zaher Dirkey

Hi,

Please would you change and option in SourceForge project of Lazaus and FPC in Admin page, to this
-----------------
This project does NOT incorporate, access, call upon, or otherwise use encryption of any kind, including, but not limited to, open source algorithms and/or calls to encryption in the operating system or underlying platform.
-----------------

If it possible (i am not sure), to allow us download it in Syria and other country have belong to T7 <https://sourceforge.net/t7.php>

Best Regards
Zaher Dirkey
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.lazarus.freepascal.org/pipermail/lazarus/attachments/20120803/58504dff/attachment.html>

Reply by email

Reinier Olislagers
to Zaher Dirkey
Zaher Dirkey wrote 13 lines
Hi, Please would you change and option in SourceForge project of Lazaus and FPC in Admin page, to this ----------------- This project does NOT incorporate, access, call upon, or otherwise use encryption of any kind, including, but not limited to, open source algorithms and/or calls to encryption in the operating system or underlying platform. ----------------- If it possible (i am not sure), to allow us download it in Syria and other country have belong to T7 <https://sourceforge.net/t7.php>

FPC contains at least native Blowfish encryption code, so that wouldn't apply.

No idea whether Lazarus "incorporates, accesses, calls upon" etc that... but my guess is that it likely will.

Regards,
Reinier

Reply by email

Sven Barth
to Zaher Dirkey: Please would you change and option in SourceForge project of Lazaus and FPC in Admin…
Zaher Dirkey wrote 13 lines
Hi, Please would you change and option in SourceForge project of Lazaus and FPC in Admin page, to this ----------------- This project does NOT incorporate, access, call upon, or otherwise use encryption of any kind, including, but not limited to, open source algorithms and/or calls to encryption in the operating system or underlying platform. ----------------- If it possible (i am not sure), to allow us download it in Syria and other country have belong to T7 <https://sourceforge.net/t7.php>

FPC can also be found here: ftp://ftp.freepascal.org/pub/fpc/dist/2.6.0/

And Lazarus could normally be found here:
ftp://freepascal.dfmk.hu/pub/lazarus/snapshots/ , but it seems that only the sources and the Mac OS X distributions of the RC are located there...

Regards,
Sven

Reply by email

Mattias Gaertner
to Reinier Olislagers: FPC contains at least native Blowfish encryption code, so that wouldn't apply. No idea…
Show quoted text 20 lines
On 3-8-2012 21:16, Zaher Dirkey wrote: > Hi, > > Please would you change and option in SourceForge project of Lazaus and > FPC in Admin page, to this > ----------------- > This project does NOT incorporate, access, call upon, or otherwise use > encryption of any kind, including, but not limited to, open source > algorithms and/or calls to encryption in the operating system or > underlying platform. > ----------------- > > If it possible (i am not sure), to allow us download it in Syria and > other country have belong to T7 <https://sourceforge.net/t7.php> FPC contains at least native Blowfish encryption code, so that wouldn't apply. No idea whether Lazarus "incorporates, accesses, calls upon" etc that... but my guess is that it likely will.

Lazarus does not use the blowfish unit, but it ships fpc on its download pages.

Mattias

Reply by email

Mark Morgan Lloyd
to Mattias Gaertner: On Fri, 03 Aug 2012 21:32:08 +0200 Lazarus does not use the blowfish unit, but it ships…
Mattias Gaertner wrote 25 lines
On Fri, 03 Aug 2012 21:32:08 +0200 Reinier Olislagers wrote: > On 3-8-2012 21:16, Zaher Dirkey wrote: >> Hi, >> >> Please would you change and option in SourceForge project of Lazaus and >> FPC in Admin page, to this >> ----------------- >> This project does NOT incorporate, access, call upon, or otherwise use >> encryption of any kind, including, but not limited to, open source >> algorithms and/or calls to encryption in the operating system or >> underlying platform. >> ----------------- >> >> If it possible (i am not sure), to allow us download it in Syria and >> other country have belong to T7 <https://sourceforge.net/t7.php> > FPC contains at least native Blowfish encryption code, so that wouldn't > apply. > > No idea whether Lazarus "incorporates, accesses, calls upon" etc that... > but my guess is that it likely will. Lazarus does not use the blowfish unit, but it ships fpc on its download pages.

Why is this relevant to a project which is predominantly European? If Sourceforge can't distribute it because of the laws under which they operate then we should look for an alternative.

Mark Morgan Lloyd markMLl .AT. telemetry.co .DOT. uk [Opinions above are the author's, not those of his employers or colleagues]

Reply by email

Zaher Dirkey
to Mark Morgan Lloyd

On Sat, Aug 4, 2012 at 2:30 AM, Mark Morgan Lloyd <

wrote: Why is this relevant to a project which is predominantly European?

It is good idea from SourceForge to make it project responsibility, compared to google, googlecode forbid my country for all projects.

Best Regards

Zaher Dirkey
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.lazarus.freepascal.org/pipermail/lazarus/attachments/20120804/63fe7d0b/attachment.html>

Reply by email

Hans-Peter Diettrich
to Mark Morgan Lloyd: Why is this relevant to a project which is predominantly European? If Sourceforge can't…
Show quoted text 14 lines
>>> If it possible (i am not sure), to allow us download it in Syria and >>> other country have belong to T7 <https://sourceforge.net/t7.php> >> FPC contains at least native Blowfish encryption code, so that wouldn't >> apply. >> >> No idea whether Lazarus "incorporates, accesses, calls upon" etc that... >> but my guess is that it likely will. > > Lazarus does not use the blowfish unit, but it ships fpc on its > download pages. Why is this relevant to a project which is predominantly European? If Sourceforge can't distribute it because of the laws under which they operate then we should look for an alternative.

The restriction is an *international* agreement, not limited to SourceForge or the USA. We should accept the weird political reasoning, and distribute encryption units only as add-ons.

DoDi

Reply by email

Marco van de Voort
to Hans-Peter Diettrich
Hans-Peter Diettrich wrote 7 lines
> > Why is this relevant to a project which is predominantly European? If > Sourceforge can't distribute it because of the laws under which they > operate then we should look for an alternative. The restriction is an *international* agreement, not limited to SourceForge or the USA.

What restriction? The categorization of SF.NET "contains crypto" is US only, we had to send a mail to the relevant US ministry even.

Nothing International about it. Russia blocked nearly all sanctions and continues to deliver military equipment.

We should accept the weird political reasoning, and distribute encryption units only as add-ons.

No. Either drop sf.net as hosting or add a minor mirror on free soil, but not complicate everyday work because of it.

Reply by email

Bernd K.
to Hans-Peter Diettrich: The restriction is an *international* agreement, not limited to SourceForge or the USA.…
Hans-Peter Diettrich wrote
The restriction is an *international* agreement, not limited to SourceForge or the USA. We should accept the weird political reasoning,

No. Such nonsense should not be accepted by *anybody* because by accepting it you agree with it and nobody should ever agree with something like this. I vote for changing the hosting platform.

Bernd

Reply by email

Mark Morgan Lloyd
to Bernd K.
Bernd K. wrote 8 lines
On 04.08.2012 13:29, Hans-Peter Diettrich wrote: > The restriction is an *international* agreement, not limited to > SourceForge or the USA. We should accept the weird political reasoning, No. Such nonsense should not be accepted by *anybody* because by accepting it you agree with it and nobody should ever agree with something like this. I vote for changing the hosting platform.

I'm not happy being indebted to SourceForge, but I'm neutral on any change.

The specific reason that I'm not happy is that a few years ago we had a very nasty situation in the UK where an American-owned colo handed a London-based server to an American enforcement/intelligence agency in contravention of UK law.

In practical terms, I'm not sure that somebody like Berlios would be significantly better. But at least the owners are in Europe, and taking into account extant treaties and conventions I'd trust the Germans over the Americans any day.

Mark Morgan Lloyd markMLl .AT. telemetry.co .DOT. uk [Opinions above are the author's, not those of his employers or colleagues]

Reply by email

Mark Morgan Lloyd
to Hans-Peter Diettrich: See the Wassenaar Arrangement <wassenaar.org>, Cat. 5.D.2 (encryption software), and the…
Hans-Peter Diettrich wrote 12 lines
Marco van de Voort schrieb: > On Sat, Aug 04, 2012 at 12:29:02PM +0100, Hans-Peter Diettrich wrote: >>> Why is this relevant to a project which is predominantly European? >>> If Sourceforge can't distribute it because of the laws under which >>> they operate then we should look for an alternative. >> The restriction is an *international* agreement, not limited to >> SourceForge or the USA. > > What restriction? See the Wassenaar Arrangement <wassenaar.org>, Cat. 5.D.2 (encryption software), and the participating states.

If it had treaty status, and was *ratified* by all parties (something the USA, in particular, is extremely bad at) that would be one thing. But as it stands it's little better than a cartel of arms-manufacturing countries.

Are you really saying that because the Vatican isn't a signatory that we shouldn't allow them to download an unexpurgated FPC?

Mark Morgan Lloyd markMLl .AT. telemetry.co .DOT. uk [Opinions above are the author's, not those of his employers or colleagues]

Reply by email

Hans-Peter Diettrich
to Marco van de Voort: What restriction? The categorization of SF.NET "contains crypto" is US only, we had to…
Show quoted text 8 lines
On Sat, Aug 04, 2012 at 12:29:02PM +0100, Hans-Peter Diettrich wrote: >> Why is this relevant to a project which is predominantly European? If >> Sourceforge can't distribute it because of the laws under which they >> operate then we should look for an alternative. > The restriction is an *international* agreement, not limited to > SourceForge or the USA. What restriction?

See the Wassenaar Arrangement <wassenaar.org>, Cat. 5.D.2 (encryption software), and the participating states.

DoDi

Reply by email

Marco van de Voort
to Hans-Peter Diettrich
Hans-Peter Diettrich wrote 7 lines
>> The restriction is an *international* agreement, not limited to >> SourceForge or the USA. > > What restriction? See the Wassenaar Arrangement <wassenaar.org>, Cat. 5.D.2 (encryption software), and the participating states.

That is mostly paper, see the FAQ:

---

How are regulations on export controls implemented in the WA?

Export controls are implemented by each individual WA Participating State. Although the scope of export controls in Participating States is determined by WA lists, practical implementation varies from country to country in accordance with national procedures.
---

Afaik the only state that enforces such measures on old encryption, for which code has been been widely available for 20 years, is the USA.

Btw, while I'm uncomfortable with the SF.NET situation, I don't like rash matters like switching providers. At least sf.net has been long time stable.

It could be a good reason to have at least one separate mirror somewhere to defang the biggest problems, not need to change everything.

Reply by email

Zaher Dirkey
to Marco van de Voort
Marco van de Voort wrote 5 lines
Btw, while I'm uncomfortable with the SF.NET situation, I don't like rash matters like switching providers. At least sf.net has been long time stable.

Agree, i like SF, my project hosted there also.

It could be a good reason to have at least one separate mirror somewhere to defang the biggest problems, not need to change everything.

One simple mirror only for last Release version for Lazarus.

Best Regards
Zaher Dirkey
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.lazarus.freepascal.org/pipermail/lazarus/attachments/20120805/612f33d0/attachment.html>

Reply by email

Hans-Peter Diettrich
to Mark Morgan Lloyd: If it had treaty status, and was *ratified* by all parties (something the USA, in…
Show quoted text 10 lines
> See the Wassenaar Arrangement <wassenaar.org>, Cat. 5.D.2 (encryption > software), and the participating states. If it had treaty status, and was *ratified* by all parties (something the USA, in particular, is extremely bad at) that would be one thing. But as it stands it's little better than a cartel of arms-manufacturing countries. Are you really saying that because the Vatican isn't a signatory that we shouldn't allow them to download an unexpurgated FPC?

It's not a matter of what *we* allow, intstead the *hosters* of the participating states are bound to not distribute such software.

DoDi

Reply by email

Hans-Peter Diettrich
to Bernd K.: No. Such nonsense should not be accepted by *anybody* because by accepting it you agree…
Show quoted text 8 lines
On 04.08.2012 13:29, Hans-Peter Diettrich wrote: > The restriction is an *international* agreement, not limited to > SourceForge or the USA. We should accept the weird political reasoning, No. Such nonsense should not be accepted by *anybody* because by accepting it you agree with it and nobody should ever agree with something like this.

Of course you can ignore the facts, that Germany, Netherlands etc. countries have signed the arrangement, and enforce the restrictions by local law (EU wide, I suppose). But it may not be wise to do so...

FPC and Lazarus are not the right platforms for propagating political opinions. Let's simply remove the Blowfish package, and everything is fine.

I vote for changing the hosting platform.

-1

DoDi

Reply by email

Mark Morgan Lloyd
to Hans-Peter Diettrich
Hans-Peter Diettrich wrote 16 lines
Bernd K. schrieb: > On 04.08.2012 13:29, Hans-Peter Diettrich wrote: > >> The restriction is an *international* agreement, not limited to >> SourceForge or the USA. We should accept the weird political reasoning, > > No. Such nonsense should not be accepted by *anybody* because by > accepting it you agree with it and nobody should ever agree with > something like this. Of course you can ignore the facts, that Germany, Netherlands etc. countries have signed the arrangement, and enforce the restrictions by local law (EU wide, I suppose). But it may not be wise to do so... FPC and Lazarus are not the right platforms for propagating political opinions. Let's simply remove the Blowfish package, and everything is fine.

I think it's a decision for the core developers, who need to ensure- above all else- that they are not exposed to legal action in their home countries by what the project puts on a server somewhere.

Mark Morgan Lloyd markMLl .AT. telemetry.co .DOT. uk [Opinions above are the author's, not those of his employers or colleagues]

Reply by email

Bernd K.
to Hans-Peter Diettrich: Of course you can ignore the facts, that Germany, Netherlands etc. countries have signed…
Hans-Peter Diettrich wrote
Of course you can ignore the facts, that Germany, Netherlands etc. countries have signed the arrangement, and enforce the restrictions by local law (EU wide, I suppose). But it may not be wise to do so...

There is no arrangement that has been signed. This is about the US not wanting to export cryptography from the US into certain countries. This is a US-only thing. FPC is not affected by it, its not a US based project so it will not be (and never was) exported from the US if you simply host it outside the US. Removing valuable parts of the code only to obey to some random nonsense regulations in foreign countries (US) that do not apply anyways would be complete nonsense.

Reply by email

Hans-Peter Diettrich
to Mark Morgan Lloyd: I think it's a decision for the core developers, who need to ensure- above all else- that…
Show quoted text 7 lines
> FPC and Lazarus are not the right platforms for propagating political > opinions. Let's simply remove the Blowfish package, and everything is > fine. I think it's a decision for the core developers, who need to ensure- above all else- that they are not exposed to legal action in their home countries by what the project puts on a server somewhere.

No problem here, when the material is not otherwise illegal. The only consequence affects the distribution of the uploads, what can mean:
- it can be removed entirely from the server,
- download can be blocked for certain countries[1]
- the server provider is sued for not taking such action,
- the server may be blacklisted
...

[1] AFAIR we already had this problem, where a guy from Cuba complained some time ago that he was not allowed to download FPC/Lazarus, because his country is one of the blocked states.

DoDi

Reply by email