linux-kernel - Re: ndiswrapper and GPL-only symbols redux

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]

Date:	Tue, 29 Jan 2008 19:20:20 -0500
From:	Jon Masters <jonathan@...masters.org>
To:	Pavel Roskin <proski@....org>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
	Giridhar Pemmasani <pgiri@...oo.com>
Subject: Re: ndiswrapper and GPL-only symbols redux

On Tue, 2008-01-29 at 16:22 -0500, Pavel Roskin wrote:
> Hello!
> 
> It have come to my attention that a patch has been committed to the
> kernel with the explicit purpose of tainting ndiswrapper - the kernel
> module allowing Windows NDIS drivers for Ethernet and Wireless cards to
> be used by the kernel.
> 
> That's the commit in question:
> http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git;a=commit;h=0aa5bd52d0c49ca56d24584c646e6544ccbb3dc9

Yup. There was (what I thought was) a bug in the existing logic (an
explicit match on "ndiswrapper", and a setting of the global kernel
taint flags) and I corrected it to do what I thought it was actually
intending to do, but hadn't been. Was I mistaken? What's the point of
setting the global taint if we don't know why we set that?

> - ndiswrapper is licensed under GPL

Yes it is. But I thought the existing code was intending to taint the
kernel (that's what it does), so it would really help to identify why it
tainted the kernel, by calling add_taint_module instead of add_taint. I
didn't put the existing match in there...don't shoot the messenger :)

> - ndiswrapper needs GPL-only symbols

Another fix would be for ndiswrapper to explicitly set the taint when it
loads a tainted driver? Or do we just want to go back to globally
"tainting" the kernel without assigning the blame to any module?

Jon.

--
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/