David Fetter wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 02, 2008 at 12:27:15PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>   
>> David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> writes:
>>     
>>> Just exactly which encryption legislation are we talking about
>>> here?
>>>       
>>> I know there was some fuss about this issue back in the early
>>> 1990s, but that was many, many law changes and court cases ago,
>>> world-wide.  It's far from clear to me that there's any reason
>>> other than inertia not to roll the crypto stuff into the core
>>> functionality and have done.
>>>       
>> This seems a very USA-centric view of the problem.  It's true that
>> the US export regulations no longer pose much of an issue for us
>> (but who's to say they might not become tighter again in future?);
>> the problem is there are lots of places where the laws are still
>> strict.
>>     
>
> Which places, and what laws?
>   
http://rechten.uvt.nl/koops/cryptolaw/cls-sum.htm

(Info only - I have not spent time considering the issue at hand thus, 
counter to net tradition, offer no opinion.)

Cheers,
Steve

In response to

• Re: [GENERAL] SHA1 on postgres 8.3 at 2008-04-02 16:32:10 from David Fetter

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:	From: Tom Lane	Date: 2008-04-02 16:49:38
	Subject: Re: [GENERAL] SHA1 on postgres 8.3
Previous:	From: sanjay sharma	Date: 2008-04-02 16:38:17
	Subject: Re: [GENERAL] SHA1 on postgres 8.3

pgsql-general by date

Next:	From: Steve Atkins	Date: 2008-04-02 16:43:49
	Subject: Re: Is there an md5sum for tables?
Previous:	From: sanjay sharma	Date: 2008-04-02 16:38:17
	Subject: Re: [GENERAL] SHA1 on postgres 8.3