netdev - Re: [PATCH net 0/3] net/sched Bind logic fixes for cls_fw, cls_u32 and cls

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: <CAEBa_SB6KCa787D3y4ozBczbHfZrsscBMmD9PS1RjcC=375jog@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2023 21:05:23 +0200
From: valis <sec@...is.email>
To: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, jhs@...atatu.com, xiyou.wangcong@...il.com, 
	jiri@...nulli.us, davem@...emloft.net, edumazet@...gle.com, kuba@...nel.org, 
	pctammela@...atatu.com, victor@...atatu.com, ramdhan@...rlabs.sg, 
	billy@...rlabs.sg
Subject: Re: [PATCH net 0/3] net/sched Bind logic fixes for cls_fw, cls_u32
 and cls_route

On Tue, Jul 25, 2023 at 2:57 PM Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> The SoB in used here sounds really like a pseudonym, which in turn is
> not explicitly forbidden by the the process, but a is IMHO a bit
> borderline:
>
> https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v6.4.5/source/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst#L415
>
> @valis: could you please re-submit this using your a more
> identificative account? You can retain the already collected acks.

Hi Paolo!

The document you quoted does not forbid pseudonyms.
In fact, it was recently updated to clarify that very fact.

You might want to take a look at this commit:

commit d4563201f33a022fc0353033d9dfeb1606a88330
Author: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Date:   Sun Feb 26 11:25:04 2023 -0800

    Documentation: simplify and clarify DCO contribution example language

    Long long ago, in a more innocent time, Greg wrote the clarification for
    how the DCO should work and that you couldn't make anonymous
    contributions, because the sign-off needed to be something we could
    check back with.

    It was 2006, and nobody reacted to the wording, the whole Facebook 'real
    name' controversy was a decade in the future, and nobody even thought
    about it.  And despite the language, we've always accepted nicknames and
    that language was never meant to be any kind of exclusionary wording.

    In fact, even when it became a discussion in other adjacent projects,
    apparently nobody even thought to just clarify the language in the
    kernel docs, and instead we had projects like the CNCF that had long
    discussions about it, and wrote their own clarifications [1] of it.

    Just simplify the wording to the point where it shouldn't be causing
    unnecessary angst and pain, or scare away people who go by preferred
    naming.

    Link: https://github.com/cncf/foundation/blob/659fd32c86dc/dco-guidelines.md
[1]
    Fixes: af45f32d25cc ("We can not allow anonymous contributions to
the kernel")
    Acked-by: Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
    Acked-by: Michael Dolan <mdolan@...uxfoundation.org>
    Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>

diff --git a/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst
b/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst
index 7dc94555417d..fab44ae732e3 100644
--- a/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst
+++ b/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst
@@ -407,7 +407,7 @@ then you just add a line saying::

        Signed-off-by: Random J Developer <random@...eloper.example.org>

-using your real name (sorry, no pseudonyms or anonymous contributions.)
+using a known identity (sorry, no anonymous contributions.)


Best regards,

valis