Re: [PATCH] crypto: vmx: Remove dubiously licensed crypto code

[Paulo Flabiano Smorigo]

On 2017-03-29 20:08, Tyrel Datwyler wrote:
> On 03/29/2017 08:13 AM, Michal SuchÃnek wrote:
> > On Wed, 29 Mar 2017 16:51:35 +0200
> > Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > > On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 02:56:39PM +0200, Michal Suchanek wrote:
> > > > While reviewing commit 11c6e16ee13a ("crypto: vmx - Adding asm
> > > > subroutines for XTS") which adds the OpenSSL license header to
> > > > drivers/crypto/vmx/aesp8-ppc.pl licensing of this driver came into
> > > > qestion. The whole license reads:
> > > >
> > > >  # Licensed under the OpenSSL license (the "License").  You may not
> > > > use # this file except in compliance with the License.  You can
> > > > obtain a # copy
> > > >  # in the file LICENSE in the source distribution or at
> > > >  # https://www.openssl.org/source/license.html
> > > >
> > > >  #
> > > >  #
> > > > ====================================================================
> > > > # Written by Andy Polyakov <appro@xxxxxxxxxxx> for the OpenSSL #
> > > > project. The module is, however, dual licensed under OpenSSL and #
> > > > CRYPTOGAMS licenses depending on where you obtain it. For further #
> > > > details see http://www.openssl.org/~appro/cryptogams/. #
> > > > ====================================================================
> > > >
> > > > After seeking legal advice it is still not clear that this driver
> > > > can be legally used in Linux. In particular the "depending on where
> > > > you obtain it" part does not make it clear when you can apply the
> > > > GPL and when the OpenSSL license.
> > > >
> > > > I tried contacting the author of the code for clarification but did
> > > > not hear back. In absence of clear licensing the only solution I
> > > > see is removing this code.
>
> A quick 'git grep OpenSSL' of the Linux tree returns several other
> crypto files under the ARM architecture that are similarly licensed. 
> Namely:
>
> arch/arm/crypto/sha1-armv4-large.S
> arch/arm/crypto/sha256-armv4.pl
> arch/arm/crypto/sha256-core.S_shipped
> arch/arm/crypto/sha512-armv4.pl
> arch/arm/crypto/sha512-core.S_shipped
> arch/arm64/crypto/sha256-core.S_shipped
> arch/arm64/crypto/sha512-armv8.pl
> arch/arm64/crypto/sha512-core.S_shipped
>
> On closer inspection of some of those files have the addendum that
> "Permission to use under GPL terms is granted", but not all of them.
>
> -Tyrel

In 2015, Andy Polyakov, the author, replied in this mailing list [1]:

"I have no problems with reusing assembly modules in kernel context. The
whole idea behind cryptogams initiative was exactly to reuse code in
different contexts."

[1] https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/6027481/

--
Paulo Flabiano Smorigo
IBM Linux Technology Center