Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Thu, 4 Apr 2002 11:31:12 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Thu, 4 Apr 2002 11:31:03 -0500 Received: from nat-pool-rdu.redhat.com ([66.187.233.200]:33054 "EHLO devserv.devel.redhat.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Thu, 4 Apr 2002 11:30:57 -0500 Date: Thu, 4 Apr 2002 11:29:39 -0500 (EST) From: Ingo Molnar X-X-Sender: mingo@devserv.devel.redhat.com To: Anton Altaparmakov cc: Rik van Riel , Tigran Aivazian , Alan Cox , Keith Owens , Marcelo Tosatti , Andrea Arcangeli , Arjan van de Ven , Hugh Dickins , Stelian Pop , Linus Torvalds , Subject: Re: [PATCH 2.5.5] do export vmalloc_to_page to modules... In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20020404164546.01f41b80@pop.cus.cam.ac.uk> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 4 Apr 2002, Anton Altaparmakov wrote: > Both or these aren't really practical once you think it through. Don't > forget that each binary module can be wrapped by an GPL-module which the > kernel cannot do anything at all about and the kernel would never even > know a binary only module was loaded because the GPL module does it. > There is no such thing as security... This kind of thing is already in > use by at least two companies I know of (i.e. using open sourced glue > modules to binary only code) so it is not just a theory I am making > up... there are countries where this might be considered a 'circumvention of a technological measure' that controls access to a work. Law enforcement is not the duty of the copyright holders. There is no such thing as a burglar-safe house either. Ingo - 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/