linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/4] selftests/sgx: Harden test enclave

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:   Mon, 7 Aug 2023 08:06:03 +0200
From:   Jo Van Bulck <jo.vanbulck@...kuleuven.be>
To:     Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko@...nel.org>, linux-sgx@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] selftests/sgx: Harden test enclave

On 28.07.23 20:54, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote
> It should be relatively easy to relicense the code as most of the
> commits have Intel copyright.
> 
> Personally I would not mind because that would give opportunity for
> code that I wrote to have a wider audience but it needs to be forked
> with some other license first.

> I support also the idea of refining the selftest as a run-time, which
> could perhaps consist of the following steps:
> 
> 1. Create a repository of the self-compiling selftest with GPLv2. You
>    could add also AUTHORS file for the initial content by crawling this
>    data from the git log.
> 2. Create a commit with sob's from the required stakeholders, which
>    changes the license to something more appropriate, and get the
>    sob's with some process.

Thank you Jarkko, appreciated! I plan to start working on the fork from 
next month onwards. However, I think GPL would be the best license for 
this project and I'd prefer to stick to it for the time being.

Best,
Jo