linux-kernel - Re: Why is my copyright code in the linux kernel?

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, 2 Mar 2011 22:04:48 -0800
From:	Greg KH <gregkh@...e.de>
To:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Cc:	Ted Ts'o <tytso@....edu>,
	richard -rw- weinberger <richard.weinberger@...il.com>,
	dj@...dhat.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Why is my copyright code in the linux kernel?

On Wed, Mar 02, 2011 at 01:52:04PM -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> On 03/01/2011 03:54 PM, Ted Ts'o wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 02, 2011 at 12:30:45AM +0100, richard -rw- weinberger wrote:
> >>> You will see a remarkable resemblance to parts of
> >>> linux-2.6.36.2/drivers/staging/rt2860/common/cmm_aes.c. E.G. the AES code,
> >>
> >> please note, this is a staging driver.
> > 
> > It's not even the primary driver.  Is there anything that this driver
> > provides that isn't provided by the upstream supported, mainline
> > rt2x00 project?  I.e., can we just delete the staging driver?
> > 
> > If we are going to keep the staging driver for some reason, one of the
> > things that should be added to the TODO list would be delete its
> > driver-specific AES code and replace it with calls to the kernel's
> > generic AES code, which among other things, has the advantage that it
> > can take advantage of the AES-NI instructions provided on more modern
> > x86 CPU's.
> > 
> >>> I'd like to know who is an appropriate person to discuss this with.
> >>
> >> the code is from ralink.
> > 
> > David, you might want to contact ralink directly, since it's likely
> > they are distributing that driver with your AES code in other places
> > besides just in the mainstream kernel sources.  Even if we delete the
> > code in the staging tree, they might be distributing that driver still
> > via other means.
> > 
> 
> I think it's more fundamental than that.  If ralink -- or anyone else --
> submitted a plagiarized driver to the staging tree, we should remove it
> immediately unless the copyright holder (David in this case) is willing
> to allow us to retain it while things are sorted out.

The problem is the code is on a public web site that says "this code is
in the public domain."  I'm not going to go into the whole "what does
public domain really mean" argument here, but I think the people who
took that code and put it into their drivers have a valid assumption
that they did so properly.

thanks,

greg k-h
--
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/