> Yes.  In fact, that was my plan.  Basically have DES-less binaries in
> the distribution, then have a "security" distribution that had the DES-
> equipped versions of those programs.

Is that necessary ? Would'nt it be enough just to make two versions of
libc or libcrypt, one with full implementation and the other with just
dummy functions that would do nothing. Then one just would need to get
the library and let dynamic linking do it's magic.

So exportable system.tar.gz would have just the library and password
files. It should be trivial to take gnulibc-crypt and use it to
compile new version of the library.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------