linux-kernel - Re: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3

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: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0706202334420.31603@asgard.lang.hm>
Date:	Wed, 20 Jun 2007 23:39:03 -0700 (PDT)
From:	david@...g.hm
To:	Alexandre Oliva <aoliva@...hat.com>
cc:	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 Thu, 21 Jun 2007, Alexandre Oliva wrote:

> On Jun 21, 2007, david@...g.hm wrote:
>
>> how exactly can they prevent a system that's been tampered with from
>> accessing their network?
>
> By denying access to their servers?  By not granting whatever is
> needed to initiate network sessions?
>
> And note, "it's been tampered with" is not necessarily enough of a
> reason to cut someone off, it has to meet these requirements:

how can the server tell if it's been tampered with?

>>   when the modification itself materially and adversely affects the
>>   operation of the network or violates the rules and protocols for
>>   communication across the network.
>
>> (something even you say they have a right to do)
>
> as long as this right is not used by the software distributor to
> impose restrictions on the user's ability to adapt the software to
> their own needs.  The GPLv3 paragraph above makes a fair concession in
> this regard, don't you agree?

no, one of the rules for the network is that the software must be 
certified, you are requireing the device to permit the software to be 
changed to an uncertified version.(to store credit card numbers and send 
them to a third party for example)

David Lang
-
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/