Reading the charges, one jump to my mind as being scary:
"Importation d'un moyen de cryptologie n'assurant pas exclusivement des fonctions d'authentification ou de contrôle d'intégrité sans déclaration préalable."
- Import of a cryptographic mean that does not exclusively perform authentication or integrity control functions without prior declaration.
This to me is a deeply disturbing charge, would that mean that using full disk encryption I'd be liable to be charged with that? Did the maintainers of LUKS do a prior declaration? If not are they likely to be charged if they ever travel to France?
After all, I can fully imagine a server being seized in a data center being encrypted with LUKS. In that case, is it the fault of the maintainers?
"Importation d'un moyen de cryptologie n'assurant pas exclusivement des fonctions d'authentification ou de contrôle d'intégrité sans déclaration préalable."
- Import of a cryptographic mean that does not exclusively perform authentication or integrity control functions without prior declaration.
This to me is a deeply disturbing charge, would that mean that using full disk encryption I'd be liable to be charged with that? Did the maintainers of LUKS do a prior declaration? If not are they likely to be charged if they ever travel to France?
After all, I can fully imagine a server being seized in a data center being encrypted with LUKS. In that case, is it the fault of the maintainers?