linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] CREDITS: remove link http://www.dementia.org/~shadow

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: <20200714154708.71b3efe2@lwn.net>
Date:   Tue, 14 Jul 2020 15:47:08 -0600
From:   Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>
To:     "Alexander A. Klimov" <grandmaster@...klimov.de>
Cc:     torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, ribalda@...nel.org,
        viro@...iv.linux.org.uk, mchehab+samsung@...nel.org,
        luis.f.correia@...il.com, geert+renesas@...der.be,
        paulburton@...nel.org, cyphar@...har.com, martink@...teo.de,
        davej@...emonkey.org.uk, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] CREDITS: remove link http://www.dementia.org/~shadow

On Tue, 14 Jul 2020 21:38:05 +0200
"Alexander A. Klimov" <grandmaster@...klimov.de> wrote:

> Rationale:
> The way it redirects looks like a fallback from a dead URL to a generic one.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Alexander A. Klimov <grandmaster@...klimov.de>
> ---
>  Yes, I noted that some of the links removed by these "CREDITS: remove link:"
>  patches have email addresses with the same domain nearby.
> 
>  Don't worry, I'll take care of them together with all other
>  dead email addresses - but not right now.
> 
> 
>  CREDITS | 1 -
>  1 file changed, 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/CREDITS b/CREDITS
> index 0787b5872906..92ad22b7ef56 100644
> --- a/CREDITS
> +++ b/CREDITS
> @@ -483,7 +483,6 @@ D: Intel Wireless WiMAX Connection 2400 SDIO driver
>  
>  N: Derrick J. Brashear
>  E: shadow@...entia.org
> -W: http://www.dementia.org/~shadow

So thanks for addressing these.  That said, I do wonder if this is quite
the right thing to do.  I'm assuming that the old sites still exist in the
wayback machine somewhere, and somebody might actually want to find them.
Pity the poor anthropologist researching the origins of the the
billion-line, free-software kernels widely used in the 2500's...

So maybe we should either mark it as "[BROKEN]" or make a direct link into
the wayback machine instead?  That would enable the suitably motivated to
go after the content that once existed.

Thoughts anybody?

Thanks,

jon