lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2004]   [Apr]   [29]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [hsflinux] [PATCH] Blacklist binary-only modules lying about their license


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@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 14:02    [W:0.189 / U:0.948 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site