Hi, On Sun, 30 Apr 2017 15:56:02 +0300 Alex Efros wrote: > Hi! > > On Sun, Apr 30, 2017 at 01:55:16PM +0200, SK wrote: > > And it's not about money from what I've read, should read this if you > > want some more information : > > If it's all just about credits, ego and personal conflict with LF - when > they the hell it affects everybody else? AFAIK Gentoo Hardened and > probably most other distributions which use GrSec/PaX have nothing with > all of this. Wanna say "fuuuu" to LF? No prob, change license to say only > listed Linux distributions may continue using GrSec/PaX for free.
They can't do this. Because GrSec/PaX is a derivative from Linux kernel (and some other projects), so they can't change a license to the kernel changes they made. If they do, this will be a clear GPLv2 violation and the LF (as well as any other author of a tiniest piece of the kernel) may sue them for the license violation. > Also, if it's NSA case, next step will be to add backdoor into GrSec/PaX > (I suppose everyone realize that) which will eventually ruin Open Source > Security Inc. business anyway. Not necessarily. NSA and affiliates also use Linux and are interested in the enhanced security. So this company may just move on the payroll. But I agree with you that further discussion of possible external enforcement is unproductive, because there is nothing we can do here. Best regards, Andrew Savchenko
pgpv963YXhEZ1.pgp
Description: PGP signature
