full-disclosure - viruses being sent to list

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

From: alerta at redsegura.com (Alerta Redsegura)
Subject: viruses being sent to list

>> 1., First Amendment defines free speech. Source code has been proven
>> free speech. Executables are not covered by free speech

>this statement is illogical.

As Laura Jennings states in http://www.lexpoetica.net/lex/lex_technica.html:

"while a2 + b2 = c2 may be illegal, the statement that the square of the
hypotenuse of a right triangle is equal to the sum of the square of its
sides may be just fine".

To understand what has been happening in the U.S. with the legal status of
"source code", "object code" and executables,
there are, IMHO, some key documents to read:

1.  Junger v. US Dept. of State  -
http://www.eff.org/Legal/Cases/Junger_v_DoS/

2.  Bernstein v. U.S. Department of Justice  -
http://www.eff.org/Privacy/ITAR_export/Bernstein_case/

3.  DVD-CCA v. Bunner and DVD-CCA v. Pavlovich  -
http://www.eff.org/IP/Video/DVDCCA_case/

4. Digital Millennium Copyright Act  -
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c105:H.R.2281.ENR:

Happy reading!

Inigo Koch
Red Segura