Crispin Cowan wrote: > Now lets just calm down. While that is possible, it is not > clear that is the case, and I dare say it is not even likely. > What's likely happening is that SCC geeks are having it out > with SCC legal, and they don't want to say ANYTHING until > they can say something definitive. In this context, removing > the previous vague & confusing statement just seems responsible. > > Crispin What is vague or confusing about: "There will be no restrictions on the use of TE be the Linux open source community." Or "We will release source code for all the modifications to the existing kernel and for a general-purose security policy engine under the GPL" Which they did. That is what the NAI based there work on. Mark _______________________________________________ linux-security-module mailing list linux-security-moduleat_private http://mail.wirex.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-security-module
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Fri Jun 07 2002 - 11:02:18 PDT