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  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
 
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:   Thu, 9 Nov 2017 10:45:27 +0100
From:   Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>
To:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Legal question: Author, Sign-off, Company Copyright and gmail


Hi all,

I noticed a practice when the patches are submitted where I'm a bit
confused about how it fits with the DCO.

People are creating gmail accounts to send patches on behalf of their
company because the company's email configuration does not allow to send
patches or adds extra infos, or whatever...

That ends up with patches submitted by a gmail account with no history
and verifiable origin and new files containing a company copyright [1].

At the first glance I would say, it is not allowed, and if a company is
willing to do opensource, it should provide the tools to its employees
to do so. But I don't want block patch submission if this practice is
tolerated.

What is the policy in this case ?

Thanks in advance.

  -- Daniel

[1] https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10045815/

-- 
 <http://www.linaro.org/> Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs

Follow Linaro:  <http://www.facebook.com/pages/Linaro> Facebook |
<http://twitter.com/#!/linaroorg> Twitter |
<http://www.linaro.org/linaro-blog/> Blog

Powered by blists - more mailing lists