Amateur Radio/FCC and the "none" encryption option

Curt, WE7U archer at
Sat Nov 12 04:57:05 EST 2005

On Wed, 9 Nov 2005, Curt, WE7U wrote:

> Is there an easy way to get the "none" option back into OpenSSH?  In
> order to do TCP/IP over amateur radio in the U.S. (and most other
> countries) we must not use encryption to obscure the meaning of our
> info, but we are allowed to use authentication to set up the links.
> This means we need normal authentication but we need the "none"
> option back in OpenSSH in order to use it across radio links.  I
> found some stuff in the archives that talked about old patches and
> such, but the developers seem dead-set against adding "none" back in
> as an option.  Is this because nobody could demonstrate a "need",
> only a "want"?  Well, here's a "need"!

Is there no answer back from the devel. team on this one?  We've
been struggling to keep this option compiled in and it's been
getting harder to find old enough versions that the patches will
apply to, and harder to compile such on newer systems.

I got one reply off-sig from someone who keeps newer patches
available, but why should this be necessary?  If there's a
demonstrated need from some group of users can't this function be
included in the sources as it used to be?  It can be made more
difficult to accidentally compile in as a default, perhaps a
special #define or something that needs to be set or uncommented.

Again, this is for use over amateur radio links, and the FCC doesn't
allow us to encrypt over radio links.  We're allowed to
authenticate, but not encrypt the data over a link.

Any response?

Curt, WE7U.   APRS Client Comparisons:
"Lotto:    A tax on people who are bad at math." -- unknown
"Windows:  Microsoft's tax on computer illiterates." -- WE7U
"The world DOES revolve around me:  I picked the coordinate system!"

More information about the openssh-unix-dev mailing list