linux-kernel - Re: [malware-list] [RFC 0/5] [TALPA] Intro to a linuxinterfaceforon access scanning

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:	Wed, 6 Aug 2008 13:50:08 +0300
From:	Adrian Bunk <bunk@...nel.org>
To:	tvrtko.ursulin@...hos.com
Cc:	Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>, Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>,
	"Press, Jonathan" <Jonathan.Press@...com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org,
	malware-list@...ts.printk.net
Subject: Re: [malware-list] [RFC 0/5] [TALPA] Intro to a
	linuxinterfaceforon access scanning

On Wed, Aug 06, 2008 at 11:05:43AM +0100, tvrtko.ursulin@...hos.com wrote:
> Greg KH wrote on 05/08/2008 21:26:21:
> 
> > > [JON PRESS]  I wouldn't call it lazy, actually.  It's more like
> > > "economical" or "ergonomic" -- or, dare I say it -- "user-friendly." 
> In
> > > this case, the users are the AV vendors who will have to write to the
> > > API that will come out of this spec.  We will be more inclined to
> > > appreciate the SDK (for want of a better term) if it covers all the
> > > bases, rather than force us to go elsewhere for some of our
> > > requirements.  When we write SDKs, we try to make sure that our users
> > > will find whatever they need.
> > 
> > But realize that you are adding an overhead on us, the kernel community,
> > to make your life easier.  We are the ones that are taking our time to
> > review and comment on this code.  We are the ones who will have to live
> > with this code for forever, and maintain it over the lifetime of linux.
> > So far, you all have shown no willingness to give anything back to us at
> > all.
> 
> We all? How is that true? I for example wrote some code and am willing to 
> help maintain it if it gets accepted. And as you describe it, it would be 
> true for any submission because not all things are usefull for all people, 
> while everything is baggage for the community. And who is the community? I 
> thought all who take place in discussions, bug reporting, submitting code, 
> fixing bugs etc are the community.

As an observer of this thread:

- Some set of requirements suddenly appears out of the void on 
  linux-kernel.
- Noone is able and/or willing to exactly describe the problem(s) they 
  are trying to solve.

With this status quo the discussion is going nowhere - Linux kernel 
development does not work this way.

The aim is not to include this code, but to find the best technical 
solution for your problem(s) - no matter whether this will have anything
in common with the list of requirements and the code posted or not.

> Tvrtko

cu
Adrian

-- 

       "Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
        of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
       "Only a promise," Lao Er said.
                                       Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed

--
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/