eak"
> policy on RHEL sources too... VMware even goes so far as to blatantly
> claim not to use Linux. How about Google's internal Linux?
>
> GPL is dead (has been for 20y), build the strongest defenses you can
> with whatever code you can get and prove, because your adversaries
&g
> > policy on RHEL sources too... VMware even goes so far as to blatantly
> > claim not to use Linux. How about Google's internal Linux?
> >
> > GPL is dead (has been for 20y), build the strongest defenses you can
> > with whatever code you can get and prove, because
ir tooling adheres to.
Boris Lukashev
Systems Architect
Semper Victus
Original Message
From: linuxgpl...@redchan.it
Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2019 05:35 PM
To: br...@perens.com
Subject: Re: GRSec is vital to Linux security
CC:
mog...@columbia.edu,bk...@sfconservancy.org,complia...@sfconservancy.org,blukas...@sempervictus.com,tcall...@redhat.com,torva...@osdl.org
One note: If you are going to defend your copyrights and the idea of the
GPL, do not rely on the "free software legal groups".
The "free software legal groups" exist only to commit legal malpractice.
The guy who ran the SFConservancy (Bradly Kuhn IIRC) isn't even a
lawyer. He advises "clients
On 2019-01-24 15:31, Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult wrote:
Do you have some actual proposals / patches ?
Sue Open Source Security / Bradly Spengler for copyright infringement.
Seek his profits as damages. I doubt you'll be able to get specific
performance since the GPL is not a contact in t
Original Message
Subject: Re: GRSec is vital to Linux security
Date: 2019-01-24 16:25
From: Boris Lukashev
To: linuxgpl...@redchan.it
You've never heard of VMware, I take it? Its a proprietary half Linux
which beats GPL suits with strong arm tactics and technical
On Thu, Jan 24, 2019 at 04:31:10PM +0100, Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult
wrote:
> On 23.01.19 21:46, Ivan Ivanov wrote:
>
> > Linux really needs to stop adding new features and
> > refactor itself to a smaller and more secure codebase before going
> > forward. Maybe 1 year break would be nice.
On 23.01.19 21:46, Ivan Ivanov wrote:
> Linux really needs to stop adding new features and
> refactor itself to a smaller and more secure codebase before going
> forward. Maybe 1 year break would be nice.
Do you have some actual proposals / patches ?
--mtx
--
Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult
On 2019-01-23 20:46, Ivan Ivanov wrote:
Interesting point of view. Well, to be honest it seems to me that
Linux kernel sacrifices the security for the sake of progress, so it
is quite bloated at the moment and I am not sure that even GRSecurity
could fix it. Linux really needs to stop adding new
Interesting point of view. Well, to be honest it seems to me that
Linux kernel sacrifices the security for the sake of progress, so it
is quite bloated at the moment and I am not sure that even GRSecurity
could fix it. Linux really needs to stop adding new features and
refactor itself to a smaller
There are two iron laws when it comes to the linux-kernel and it's
facing towards the larger world.
1) The grsecurity-pax patch is absolutely vital if one wishes to not be
hacked by chinese(TM). (And has been vital for the last 15+ years.)
2) GRSecurity is _blatantly_ violating the GPL by adding
11 matches
Mail list logo
