linux-kernel - Re: [RFC] vtunerc: virtual DVB device - is it ok to NACK driver because of worrying about possible misusage?

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: <CAOcJUbw6YKM8ysV_R8SWfFSHuUPNDR2WBjuKAhYPPYM9+EUfPA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Wed, 30 Nov 2011 16:52:40 -0500
From:	Michael Krufky <mkrufky@...uxtv.org>
To:	HoP <jpetrous@...il.com>
Cc:	linux-media@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] vtunerc: virtual DVB device - is it ok to NACK driver
 because of worrying about possible misusage?

On Wed, Nov 30, 2011 at 4:38 PM, HoP <jpetrous@...il.com> wrote:
> Hi folks.
>
> I need to warn you that my mail is a bit little longer then I would like
> to be.But I'm not able to ask my question without some
> background information.
>
> On June 19th, I was sending the driver to the Linux-media
> mailing list. Original announcement is there:
>
> http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-media/msg34240.html
>
> One would say that the code describes very well what it does = adds
> virtual DVB device. To be more clear on it I have even done some
> small picture:
>
> http://www.nessiedvb.org/wiki/doku.php?id=vtuner_bigpicture
>
> I was hoping to get any feedback regarding code implementation.
> It was my first code for the kernel and I felt very well that some
> part can be done better or even simpler.
>
> What really surprised me badly was that when I read all 54 responses
> I have counted only two real technical answers!!! All rest were about
> POLITICAL issues - code was NACKed w/o any technical discussion.
> Because of fear of possible abusing of driver.
>
> I didn't know that there existed very big movement against such
> code in dvb-core subsystem before.
>
> I have one big problem with it. I can even imagine that some "bad guys"
> could abuse virtual driver to use it for distribution close-source drivers
> in the binary blobs. But is it that - worrying about bad boys abusing -
> the sufficient reason for such aggressive NACK which I did? Then would
> be better to remove loadable module API fully from kernel. Is it the right way?
>
> Please confirm me that worrying about abusive act is enough to NACK
> particular driver. Then I may be definitely understand I'm doing something
> wrong and will stay (with such enemy driver) out of tree.
>
> I can't understand that because I see very similar drivers in kernel for ages
> (nbd, or even more similar is usbip) and seems they don't hamper to anybody.
>
> I would like to note that I don't want to start any flame-war, so very short
> answer would be enough for me.
>
> Regards
>
> Honza
>
> PS: Please be so kind and CC the answer/comment to me, I'm
> only on linux-media ML, not on linux-kernel ML. Thanks.
>
> BTW, if accidentally, somebody find it interesting and would like to
> help me doing code review, there is the code hosted now:
> http://code.google.com/p/vtuner/source/browse?repo=linux-driver

Honza,

I, for one, would love to see your virtual DVB device driver hosted in
a repository for the purposes of experimentation and additional
development.  I can think of many, many good uses for such a virtual
device driver.  Unfortunately, however, all the device vendors also
have uses for it.  It a guarunteed fact that if a driver like that got
merged into the kernel, any software company that previously sponsored
open-source kernel development would opt instead for closed source
userspace drivers that depend on a virtual DVB device.

Please don't let that discourage you -- I think you should continue
your work on this virtual DVB device driver, and I'd love to play with
it myself, and possibly even contribute to it.  ...but I will never
support the merging of this into the kernel.

I do not nack the existence of the driver -- I love the idea, and I
encourage more development.  I only nack it's merging into any
open-source linux kernel.

Please accept my answer with the greatest intentions for furthering
the development of the open-source community.  My opinion is only for
the best intentions of continued contributions from companies such as
Hauppauge and any others that have contributed thus far to v4l/dvb.

Please, keep up the work.  I repeat -- I would love to play with your work.

Best regards,

Mike Krufky
--
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/