rotor replacement

[Paul Rubin]

Nick Craig-Wood <nick at craig-wood.com> writes:
> > No, unfortunately; the python-dev consensus was that encryption raised
> > export control issues, and the existing rotor module is now on its way to
> > being removed.
> 
> I'm sure thats wrong now-a-days.  Here are some examples of open
> source software with strong crypto

There's tons of such examples, but python-dev apparently reached
consensus that the Python maintainers were less willing than the
maintainers of those other packages to deal with those issues.

You're right that this specifically says export control.  I'm now
thinking I saw some other messages, again from knowledgeable posters,
saying that there was a bigger concern that including crypto in the
distribution could make trouble for users in countries where having
crypto at all was restricted.  I'll see if I can find those.

Martin, do you know more about this?  I remember being disappointed
about the decisions since I had done some work on a new block cipher
API and I had wanted to submit an implementation to the distro.  But
when I heard there was no hope of including it, I stopped working on
it.  If there's an interest in it again, I can do some more with it.