Re: Secure Computing statement of assurance

From: Crispin Cowan (crispinat_private)
Date: Sat Jul 27 2002 - 21:27:29 PDT

  • Next message: Crispin Cowan: "Re: Secure Computing statement of assurance"

    SCC wrote:
    
    > Secure Computing has reviewed the concerns expressed by the open 
    > source community about SELinux and certain Secure Computing patents.
    >
    Up-front caveats:
    
        * I am not a lawyer.
        * I don't speak for anyone but myself.
        * I have no interest in any of these issues
    
    That said, IMHO the crux of this issue has to do with who released what:
    
        * The various restrictions imposed by SCC in the
          _Statement_of_Assurance_
          <http://www.securecomputing.com/pdf/Statement_of_Assurance.pdf>
          are *not* compatible with the GPL, which says in clause 6 that
          "You may not impose any further restrictions on the recipients'
          exercise of the rights granted herein." So had it been SCC that
          released SELinux, they would be in full violation of the GPL.
        * But it was *not* SCC that released SELinux; it was the NSA and
          NAI. At issue is whether the NSA and NAI had obtained appropriate
          rights to SCC's patents to release SELinux. But since that issue
          involves complex contracts that I was not party to, I refuse to
          discuss it.
        * Therefore, NSA and NAI are within the GPL to release the code, at
          the risk of SCC some day changing their mind about the terms on
          their patent. LSM makes a lovely buffer here: Linus can accept LSM
          without infringing on the patent, and anyone who wants to use the
          module can use it. If SCC later withdraws the public's use of the
          patent, Linus doesn't have to take it out.
    
    This results in an odd conclusion: anyone can distribute SELinux-derived 
    works under the terms of the GPL (provided they're willing to risk SCC 
    later changing their mind) *except for SCC*. Because SCC's Statement of 
    Assurance is in violation of the GPL, SCC is specifically enjoined from 
    releasing modified linux kernels based on this restricted use of their 
    patent. If SCC ever wants to distribute SELinux based products, they are 
    going to have to actually GPL the patent, as opposed to this "assurance" 
    document.
    
    Crispin
    
    -- 
    Crispin Cowan, Ph.D.
    Chief Scientist, WireX                      http://wirex.com/~crispin/
    Security Hardened Linux Distribution:       http://immunix.org
    Available for purchase: http://wirex.com/Products/Immunix/purchase.html
    
    
    
    _______________________________________________
    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 : Sat Jul 27 2002 - 22:27:54 PDT