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, 19 Sep 2012 08:19:42 +0100
From:	Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:	Michael Tokarev <mjt@....msk.ru>
Cc:	Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
	Matthew Garrett <mjg59@...f.ucam.org>,
	Alex Lyashkov <umka@...udlinux.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: lve module taint?

On Wed, Sep 19, 2012 at 09:58:09AM +0400, Michael Tokarev wrote:
> On 19.09.2012 06:02, Rusty Russell wrote:
> 
> > From:	Matthew Garrett <mjg59@...f.ucam.org>
> > Subject: module: taint kernel when lve module is loaded
> > Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2012 13:49:31 -0400
> > 
> > Cloudlinux have a product called lve that includes a kernel module. This
> > was previously GPLed but is now under a proprietary license, but the
> > module continues to declare MODULE_LICENSE("GPL") and makes use of some
> > EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL symbols. Forcibly taint it in order to avoid this.
> 
> > +	/* lve claims to be GPL but upstream won't provide source */
> > +	if (strcmp(mod->name, "lve") == 0)
> > +		add_taint_module(mod, TAINT_PROPRIETARY_MODULE);
> 
> This is setting a, in my opinion, rather bad precedent.  Next we'll
> be adding various modules here due to various reasons.
> 
> I think this case should be pure political now, not technical.  Ie,
> if some project declares itself as GPL, it is not kernel task to
> verify that the sources are available or to enforce that.

But when such code is known to lie, we have the responsibility to
enforce it, right?  We already do this for other module, it's not the
first time, and hopefully we will not have to continue extending this
"blacklist" to more modules, but real-world experience tends to make me
thing otherwise :(

Rusty, no objection from me for the patch.

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/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ