Re: deprecate MARS due to patent encumbrance?

> Hi Zooko,
>
>  Rather than strip it out, how about a #define: INCLUDE_INCUMBERED or
>  similar. This way, Crypto++ does not loose features, and folks such as
>  yourself can choose to gut the encumbered algorithms.
>
>  Jeff
>
>
>  On 6/5/09, Zooko Wilcox-O'Hearn <zooko@...> wrote:
>  >
>  >  Folks:
>  >
>  >  I'm trying to get pycryptopp and Tahoe-LAFS into Fedora, and one tiny
>  >  little detail that I have to work-around is that MARS is patented.
>  >  Fedora already includes a version of Crypto++ 5.6.0 with mars.cpp
>  >  stripped out, so the only reason I even have to be aware of this
>  >  detail is that I included a copy of Crypto++ v5.6.0 inside the
>  >  pycryptopp source distribution, and now I suppose I need to remove
>  >  mars.cpp from that embedded copy.
>  >
>  >  Anyway, I was thinking that it might be nice to let Crypto++ be more
>  >  easily/more widely re-used by removing mars.cpp from the Crypto++
>  >  upstream.  I've never heard of anyone using MARS cipher, personally.
>  >  Have you?
>  >
>  >  Regards,
>  >
>  >  Zooko
>  >
>