From owner-freebsd-commit Wed Aug 2 16:58:20 1995 Return-Path: commit-owner Received: (from majordom@localhost) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.11/8.6.6) id QAA06157 for commit-outgoing; Wed, 2 Aug 1995 16:58:20 -0700 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.11/8.6.6) id QAA06141 for cvs-user-outgoing; Wed, 2 Aug 1995 16:58:17 -0700 Received: from precipice.shockwave.com (precipice.shockwave.com [171.69.108.33]) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.11/8.6.6) with ESMTP id QAA06132 ; Wed, 2 Aug 1995 16:58:12 -0700 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by precipice.shockwave.com (8.6.11/8.6.9) with SMTP id QAA15319; Wed, 2 Aug 1995 16:57:39 -0700 Message-Id: <199508022357.QAA15319@precipice.shockwave.com> To: "Justin T. Gibbs" cc: CVS-commiters@freefall.cdrom.com, cvs-user@freefall.cdrom.com Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/eBones/kdb_util kdb_util.c In-reply-to: Your message of "Wed, 02 Aug 1995 16:39:32 PDT." <199508022339.QAA05409@freefall.cdrom.com> Date: Wed, 02 Aug 1995 16:57:39 -0700 From: Paul Traina Sender: commit-owner@FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk Are all of these kerberos changes being sent to markm? Are the changes exportable? yes, and almost-yes (everything except kprop/kpropd is absolutely ok). Kprop/Kpropd are gray, if and only if, someone wants to be a real stickler, since they are clients of Kerberos and one could claim that any call to a Kerberos routine that -could- perform encryption makes the entire call tainted. However a tainted version of the same code would have one bit changed in the entire object (a 0 becomes a 1, telling kerberos to encrypt as well as authenticate the connection).