linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH v2] media: Virtual camera driver

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: <37a0d91c2e78c97f3d956444c4f7a2a2fca9ae06@intel.com>
Date: Tue, 03 Feb 2026 15:20:55 +0200
From: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@...ux.intel.com>
To: johannes.goede@....qualcomm.com, Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko@...nel.org>,
 linux-media@...r.kernel.org
Cc: anisse@...ier.eu, oleksandr@...alenko.name,
 linux-integrity@...r.kernel.org, Mauro Carvalho Chehab
 <mchehab@...nel.org>, Hans Verkuil <hverkuil@...nel.org>, Laurent Pinchart
 <laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com>, Sakari Ailus
 <sakari.ailus@...ux.intel.com>, Jacopo Mondi
 <jacopo.mondi@...asonboard.com>, Ricardo Ribalda <ribalda@...omium.org>,
 open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2] media: Virtual camera driver

On Tue, 03 Feb 2026, johannes.goede@....qualcomm.com wrote:
> The problem is that what you're suggesting is basically a much
> improved (using dma-buf is way better) v4l2-loopback driver and
> v4l2-loopback has been blocked from getting merged into the kernel
> because besides the mobile-phone camera use, the other main use-case
> is to allow running proprietary camera stacks like Intel's proprietary
> camerastack and then presenting that to userspace as a standard v4l2
> cam so that userspace apps will just work.

...

> The community concensus is that the solution here is for apps to
> access cameras through pipewire. Together with the shift of laptops
> cameras from UVC to "raw" MIPI cameras there also is a shift to
> running applications sandboxed as flatpacks because of the changing
> "cyber" security landscape. This is why pipewire was chosen because
> it also solves the accessing cameras from a sandbox issue.

Why is v4l2-loopback problematic from the perspective of facilitating
running proprietary camera stacks, but pipewire isn't?

BR,
Jani.

-- 
Jani Nikula, Intel