Date: Wed, 19 Nov 1997 19:47:41 -0800 From: "Randy A. Katz" <randyk@ccsales.com> To: Shawn Ramsey <shawn@luke.cpl.net>, questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Apache-SSL Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.19971119194741.03203100@ccsales.com> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.3.95.971119184821.3283A-100000@luke.cpl.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
When I asked the Stronghold people they said that it was not legal to use it. When I questioned further they said that is because RSA has the authority and Stronghold has an exclusivity agreement with them...I called RSA and they told me yes. Stronghold has an agreement with them but they allow others to use RSA encryption behind web site...and one of the ones they said was OK was Apache SSL...no problem. Went back to Stronghold, asked why they lied...they denied it and told me RSA might come after me and that I would have to pay $30,000 to get an arrangement with RSA like they do...RSA said they didn't understand and Apache SSL is fine and so forth... I WILL NEVER DO BUSINESS WITH STRONGHOLD EVEN IF THEY HAVE A GREAT PRODUCT. I hear they have more implementation problems then Apache SSL anyway and you pay for it (but they give you support and it's hard to figure out how to implement Apache SSL). If you go to http://www.thawte.com and look under order a server certificate you will see the procedure (sketchy). You must have ssleay and a patched version of Apache 1.2 already compiled and installed. Take care. Randy Katz At 06:49 PM 11/19/97 -0800, Shawn Ramsey wrote: >Does anyone know what the licesning issues are for Apache-SSL in the US? >Is it even possible to legally use it in the US? Just curious if it would >be worth it to use this, over say Stronghold. > > > >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3.0.5.32.19971119194741.03203100>