Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754202AbXFUKTB (ORCPT ); Thu, 21 Jun 2007 06:19:01 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751753AbXFUKSw (ORCPT ); Thu, 21 Jun 2007 06:18:52 -0400 Received: from srv1.netkinetics.net ([206.71.148.180]:33048 "EHLO srv1.netkinetics.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751681AbXFUKSv (ORCPT ); Thu, 21 Jun 2007 06:18:51 -0400 Subject: Re: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3 From: Tim Post Reply-To: tim.post@netkinetics.net To: david@lang.hm Cc: Alexandre Oliva , Andrew McKay , Alan Cox , Linus Torvalds , Al Viro , Bernd Schmidt , Ingo Molnar , Daniel Hazelton , Greg KH , debian developer , Tarkan Erimer , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Andrew Morton In-Reply-To: References: <20070615012623.GA25189@elte.hu> <20070615101007.0cbfd078@the-village.bc.nu> <4673CA7C.5040207@t-online.de> <20070616181902.GB21478@ftp.linux.org.uk> <4679557C.5080907@iders.ca> <20070620175627.319a6c55@the-village.bc.nu> <46797C52.4020907@iders.ca> Content-Type: text/plain Organization: Net Kinetics Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2007 18:15:36 +0800 Message-Id: <1182420936.9012.38.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.4.1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - srv1.netkinetics.net X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - vger.kernel.org X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [0 0] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - netkinetics.net X-Source: X-Source-Args: X-Source-Dir: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1362 Lines: 37 On Wed, 2007-06-20 at 22:30 -0700, david@lang.hm wrote: > > asking a device that's running software that you haven't verified to give > you a checksum of itself isn't going to work becouse the software can just > lie to you. > I don't think there is any way I _could_ make a device if it had to be tamper proof and use free software if that was the case. I'd need to make some kind of proprietary network connection back to my company that used its own network device. I could not trust it if the free kernel could touch it, if I wanted to allow a modified in place kernel. If I hope for that device to use the internet to talk to me (i.e. just a secondary nic), I'd have to write my own kernel to power this second network device that was capable of encrypting and validating traffic over tcp-ip. Or I have to pull my own copper to every location where my device is used. So either way, I'm writing my own kernel if I want to do that, because I could not POSSIBLY allow the kernel talking to my private connection to the device to be modified. What a nasty, vicious cycle that would be. Yikes! --Tim - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/