[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [libreplanet-discuss] Article on GRSecurity, RMS, etc.
From: |
Adam Van Ymeren |
Subject: |
Re: [libreplanet-discuss] Article on GRSecurity, RMS, etc. |
Date: |
Mon, 27 Jun 2016 12:51:59 -0400 |
On Mon, Jun 27, 2016 at 4:41 AM, Shawn <citypw@gmail.com> wrote:
> I'm not an expert of GPL compliance. I personally don't see any GPL
> violation in PaX/Grsecurity. Because of some embedded vendors pissed
> off PaX/Grsecurity's authors last year and then they decided stable
> patch was going to customer-only, which means you could get the source
> code once you paid. It's very fair to myself. Because they need to
> spend time and hire people to do the regression testing to make their
> customer's production system as stable as possible. Fortunately, they
> are still release test patch for public. As a user and a security
> consultant, test patch is good enough to deal with the most situation
> I've met.
>From what I've read. It sounds like they are making customers sign
NDAs, and/or threatening to cut them off if the customers share the
source code for those patches to anyone. This is clearly a violation
of freedom 2
"The freedom to redistribute copies so you can help your neighbor (freedom 2)."
I'm not a lawyer or expert on the GPL. The GPL may not protect
against situations like this, but it clearly goes against the spirit
of Free Software.
>
> I 'd say we are lucky to have brilliant FLOSS hackers like Spender and
> PaX team in this era. Because of them, we have a very effective
> solution for linux kernel security, which compares to other core
> infrastructures such as firmware or compiler. Even CHIPSEC and
> reproducible builds are just starting point somehow. It'd be a long
> way to protect your digital freedom away from BIGBROs just like
> PaX/Grsecurity in kernel field;-)
>
> On Sun, Jun 5, 2016 at 12:58 PM, <concernedfossdev@teknik.io> wrote:
>> Soylent news published an article/discussion on GRSecurity, RMS, etc
>> If you're interested it's here:
>> https://soylentnews.org/article.pl?sid=16/06/02/214243
>>
>>>RMS Responds - GRsecurity is Preventing Others From Redistributing Source
>>>Code [UPDATED]
>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> GNU powered it...
> GPL protect it...
> God blessing it...
>
> regards
> Shawn
>
- Re: [libreplanet-discuss] Article on GRSecurity, RMS, etc., (continued)
- Re: [libreplanet-discuss] Article on GRSecurity, RMS, etc., concernedfossdev, 2016/06/08
- Re: [libreplanet-discuss] Article on GRSecurity, RMS, etc., IngeGNUe, 2016/06/08
- [libreplanet-discuss] Fw: Article on GRSecurity, RMS, etc., Jim Kelly, 2016/06/09
- Re: [libreplanet-discuss] Fw: Article on GRSecurity, RMS, etc., concernedfossdev, 2016/06/10
- Re: [libreplanet-discuss] Fw: Article on GRSecurity, RMS, etc., John Sullivan, 2016/06/10
- Re: [libreplanet-discuss] Fw: Article on GRSecurity, RMS, etc., concernedfossdev, 2016/06/11
- Re: [libreplanet-discuss] Fw: Article on GRSecurity, RMS, etc., IngeGNUe, 2016/06/11
- Re: [libreplanet-discuss] Article on GRSecurity, RMS, etc., concernedfossdev, 2016/06/10
- Re: [libreplanet-discuss] Article on GRSecurity, RMS, etc., Divan Santana, 2016/06/24
Re: [libreplanet-discuss] Article on GRSecurity, RMS, etc., Shawn, 2016/06/27
- Re: [libreplanet-discuss] Article on GRSecurity, RMS, etc.,
Adam Van Ymeren <=
- Re: [libreplanet-discuss] Article on GRSecurity, RMS, etc., Shawn, 2016/06/28
- Re: [libreplanet-discuss] Article on GRSecurity, RMS, etc., Adam Van Ymeren, 2016/06/28
- Re: [libreplanet-discuss] Article on GRSecurity, RMS, etc., Shawn, 2016/06/29
Re: [libreplanet-discuss] Article on GRSecurity, RMS, etc., concernedfossdev, 2016/06/28
Re: [libreplanet-discuss] Article on GRSecurity, RMS, etc., concernedfossdev, 2016/06/27
Re: [libreplanet-discuss] Article on GRSecurity, RMS, etc., concernedfossdev, 2016/06/07