Re: lynx-dev Dos SSL support

[Doug Kaufman]

On 5 Jun 1998, Christopher Gray wrote:

>The whole business of SSL on LYNX for DOS is a frustrating puzzle.
>The way things look to me is that one would have to apply one or more
>SSL/SSLEASY patches to LYNX source and do a recompile. I'm a programmer,
>yet I find taking on such a task daunting to say the least.

The problem is really not with SSL or the DOS port, but with US
cryptography export regulations, which make it illegal for someone in
the US to supply a SSL version of lynx to the world. Unfortunately, most
of those working on the DOS port are in the US. Someone outside the US
could supply the binary, but those in the US probably couldn't use it
legally because of the RSA patent problem.

I am not a programmer, but lynx is easy to compile on DOS once DJGPP is
set up properly. Getting the tools going is not something that most DOS
users have the inclination to do. Until you have done it, the
documentation seems cryptic.

>In effect, this means to me that SSL is realistically unavailable for
>most LYNX users in DOS. This is a real shame and I wish somebody would
>try to talk me out of this opinion, but LYNX folks seem very silent on
>the whole SSL matter.

I suspect that those who want SSL do what I do - when you need to
use SSL, go to your unix shell and run lynx with eassl. Compiling
and configuring SSLeay and eassl for individual use is not the most
straightforward either. I suspect that most ISP's will not make the
eassl daemon available because of the same cryptography restrictions in
the US. For most people, however, you are correct. A distributable DOS
binary for use in the US is unlikely. One for the rest of the world
only takes someone outside the US to compile it and make it available.
That person hasn't volunteered yet.
                            Doug
__
Doug Kaufman
Internet: address@hidden (preferred)
          address@hidden