Re: SELinux to GPL or not to GPL

From: Seth Arnold (sarnoldat_private)
Date: Thu Jun 06 2002 - 18:32:07 PDT

  • Next message: Chris Wright: "Re: SELinux to GPL or not to GPL"

    On Thu, Jun 06, 2002 at 08:25:19PM -0400, jmjonesat_private wrote:
    > > The most serious issue is the DTE patent, and its implications for the 
    > > open source DTE LSM module. I am not aware of any statements from NAI 
    > > regarding the availability of the DTE patent.
    > I know little of this, but TE may be the "first test."  IMHO.
    The TE and DTE patents are, to my understanding, owned by different
    companies. What one company says or does about its patent does not
    affect the other company. The pieces of conversation shown here have led
    me to understand that the TE patent is free for all to use because its
    use has been granted in a GPL piece of code. Someone seriously
    considering distributing SELinux, or any other TE technology, really
    should consult their own lawyer.
    > Regardless, the LSM interface ALLOWS SELinux, as well as numerous other
    > modules.  If it's JUST an SELinux problem (the patent), then I think we'd
    > all be happy to distribute other solutions and provide a link to
    > distribution of SELinux for those willing to license it appropriately.   
    If your solution depends upon TE (or DTE, depending on what NAI decides
    to do) then you would still be constrained by the same rules: either SCC
    granted free use for all for TE, SElinux or some other implementation,
    or they did not. Your lawyer will help you sort that out.

    _______________________________________________ linux-security-module mailing list linux-security-moduleat_private

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Thu Jun 06 2002 - 18:33:17 PDT