RE: [PATCH] Ban module license tag string termination trick

Hello,

> will be written to the object file will be "license=GPL\0for 
> nothing\0". 
> When this is interpreted back again in the kernel module 
> loader, it is 
> read as "license=GPL", having circumvented the loading mechanism and 
> having wrongfully access to GPL symbols. According to Alexey [ 
> http://lkml.org/lkml/2006/10/27/233 ], LinuxAnt is one vendor to use 
> this trick.

If that is really one important point, why not simply adding a :
MODULE_IS_UNDER_GPL_LICENSE("yes|no")
and a
MODULE_IS_UNDER_GPL_LIKE_LICENSE("yes|no")

or use 0 and 1 instead of yes and no, and thus clearly avoid all the
C string mess ?

Regards,
Paul

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

---

• Follow-Ups:
  • RE: [PATCH] Ban module license tag string termination trick
    • From: Jan Engelhardt <[email protected]>

• References:
  • [PATCH] Ban module license tag string termination trick
    • From: Jan Engelhardt <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: [Fwd: Re: [PATCH 1/10] cxgb3 - main header files]
• Next by Date: Re: Slower CPU frequency reported by the kernel
• Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH] Ban module license tag string termination trick
• Next by thread: RE: [PATCH] Ban module license tag string termination trick
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Stuff]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]     [Linux Resources]