linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] USB: add SPDX identifiers to all files in drivers/usb/

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:   Fri, 20 Oct 2017 18:49:30 +0100
From:   Alan Cox <gnomes@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
To:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc:     Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, linux-usb@...r.kernel.org,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Kate Stewart <kstewart@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Philippe Ombredanne <pombredanne@...b.com>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] USB: add SPDX identifiers to all files in drivers/usb/

> But all that matters is the tag is there for tools to be able to extract
> it properly.  And if we have that, it doesn't matter what the comment
> "style" would be, so might as well make it look "nicer".
> 
> And, to take it to the next conclusion, if we have the SPDX identifier,
> we can get rid of the "boilerplate" GPL license crap as well, right?

An SPDX tag may not form a valid warranty disclaimer in many parts of
the world while the header with correct document text in capitals does.

So yes you can remove it, but since it used to have a disclaimer and
you (aka Linux Foundation) potentially removed it you might want to have a
little chat with their laywers about whether you risk assuming any
liability as a result 8)

I also don't think it would be appropriate to remove warranty disclaimers
from third party material without the owners permission (or some surety
from lawyers).

Alan