lists.openwall.net   lists  /  announce  owl-users  owl-dev  john-users  john-dev  passwdqc-users  yescrypt  popa3d-users  /  oss-security  kernel-hardening  musl  sabotage  tlsify  passwords  /  crypt-dev  xvendor  /  Bugtraq  Full-Disclosure  linux-kernel  linux-netdev  linux-ext4  linux-hardening  linux-cve-announce  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
 
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1182420936.9012.38.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Date:	Thu, 21 Jun 2007 18:15:36 +0800
From:	Tim Post <tim.post@...kinetics.net>
To:	david@...g.hm
Cc:	Alexandre Oliva <aoliva@...hat.com>,
	Andrew McKay <amckay@...rs.ca>,
	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Al Viro <viro@....linux.org.uk>,
	Bernd Schmidt <bernds_cb1@...nline.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Daniel Hazelton <dhazelton@...er.net>,
	Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>,
	debian developer <debiandev@...il.com>,
	Tarkan Erimer <tarkan@...one.net.tr>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3

On Wed, 2007-06-20 at 22:30 -0700, david@...g.hm wrote:

> 
> asking a device that's running software that you haven't verified to give 
> you a checksum of itself isn't going to work becouse the software can just 
> lie to you.
> 

I don't think there is any way I _could_ make a device if it had to be
tamper proof and use free software if that was the case. 

I'd need to make some kind of proprietary network connection back to my
company that used its own network device. I could not trust it if the
free kernel could touch it, if I wanted to allow a modified in place
kernel.

If I hope for that device to use the internet to talk to me (i.e. just a
secondary nic), I'd have to write my own kernel to power this second
network device that was capable of encrypting and validating traffic
over tcp-ip. Or I have to pull my own copper to every location where my
device is used.

So either way, I'm writing my own kernel if I want to do that, because I
could not POSSIBLY allow the kernel talking to my private connection to
the device to be modified. 

What a nasty, vicious cycle that would be. Yikes!
 

--Tim


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ