Re: [dm-devel] [RFC PATCH v5 00/11] Integrity Policy Enforcement LSM (IPE)

[Pavel Machek]

Hi!

> > > > (eg, a specification) will be critical for remote filesystems.
> > > > 
> > > > If any of this is to be supported by a remote filesystem, then we
> > > > need an unencumbered description of the new metadata format
> > > > rather than code. GPL-encumbered formats cannot be contributed to
> > > > the NFS standard, and are probably difficult for other
> > > > filesystems that are not Linux-native, like SMB, as well.
> > > 
> > > I don't understand what you mean by GPL encumbered formats.  The
> > > GPL is a code licence not a data or document licence.
> > 
> > IETF contributions occur under a BSD-style license incompatible
> > with the GPL.
> > 
> > https://trustee.ietf.org/trust-legal-provisions.html
> > 
> > Non-Linux implementers (of OEM storage devices) rely on such
> > standards processes to indemnify them against licensing claims.
> 
> Well, that simply means we won't be contributing the Linux
> implementation, right? However, IETF doesn't require BSD for all
> implementations, so that's OK.
> 
> > Today, there is no specification for existing IMA metadata formats,
> > there is only code. My lawyer tells me that because the code that
> > implements these formats is under GPL, the formats themselves cannot
> > be contributed to, say, the IETF without express permission from the
> > authors of that code. There are a lot of authors of the Linux IMA
> > code, so this is proving to be an impediment to contribution. That
> > blocks the ability to provide a fully-specified NFS protocol
> > extension to support IMA metadata formats.
> 
> Well, let me put the counterpoint: I can write a book about how
> linux

You should probably talk to your lawyer.

> device drivers work (which includes describing the data formats), for
> instance, without having to get permission from all the authors ... or
> is your lawyer taking the view we should be suing Jonathan Corbet,
> Alessandro Rubini, and Greg Kroah-Hartman for licence infringement?  In
> fact do they think we now have a huge class action possibility against
> O'Reilly  and a host of other publishers ...

Because yes, you can reverse engineer for compatibility reasons --
doing clean room re-implementation (BIOS binary -> BIOS documentation
-> BIOS sources under different license), but that was only tested in
the US, is expensive, and I understand people might be uncomfortable
doing that.

Best regards,
									Pavel

-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature