Re: [hsflinux] [PATCH] Blacklist binary-only modules lying abouttheir license

From: Timothy Miller
Date: Thu Apr 29 2004 - 15:21:43 EST




Giuliano Colla wrote:

As an end user, if I buy a full fledged modem, I get some amount of proprietary, non GPL, code which executes within the board or the PCMCIA card of the modem. The GPL driver may even support the functionality of downloading a new version of *proprietary* code into the flash Eprom of the device. The GPL linux driver interfaces with it, and all is kosher.
On the other hand, I have the misfortune of being stuck with a soft-modem, roughly the *same* proprietary code is provided as a binary file, and a linux driver (source provided) interfaces with it. In that case the kernel is flagged as "tainted".

But in both cases, if the driver is poorly written, because of developer's inadequacy, or because of the proprietary code being poorly documented and/or implemented, my kernel may go nuts, be it tainted or not.

Can you honestly tell apart the two cases, if you don't make a it a case of "religion war"?



Firmware downloaded into a piece of hardware can't corrupt the kernel in the host.

(Unless it's a bus master which writes to random memory, which might be possible, but there is hardware you can buy to watch PCI transactions.)

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