On Thu, 20 Apr 2006, Greg KH wrote:
>
> Some closed source modules are taking advantage of the fact that the
> security_ops variable is available to them, so they are using it to hook
> into parts of the kernel that should only be available to "real" users
> of the LSM interface (which is required to be under the GPL.)
I'm really not going to apply this.
It's insane.
"security_ops" is used by _anything_ that uses the inline functions in
<linux/security.h>, which suddenly means that a non-GPL module cannot use
_any_ of the standard security tests. That's insane.
And there's no point to this patch. The "explanation" I have seen so far
is that some strange root-kit could take over the security ops. That's
just crazy talk. If you're a root-kit, would you care about the copyright
license? No. So this patch just makes zero sense from any standpoint.
If people want to remove security_ops, that's fine (not for 2.6.17, but
assuming you guys can come to some reasonable agreement, at some later
date). But turning it into a GPL-only, but leaving all the infrastructure
requiring it is not.
Linus
-
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/
[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]
