Re: SELinux to GPL or not to GPL

Re: SELinux to GPL or not to GPL

[forrest whitcher]

On Thu, 06 Jun 2002 16:46:19 -0700 (unchecked - local sync NTPstrat4)
Crispin Cowan <crispin@wirex.com> did inscribe thusly:

> This is misinformation. What JMJones says applies to TRADEMARK, not 
> patents. Patent holder's rights endure, regardless of prior actions. See 
> the UNISYS/GIF patent fiasco.

I have to differ on this.

I've worked for 20 years in medical devices, in areas where virtually no
device can be developed without consideration of your own and competitors's
patents.

Our patent attorneys were very clear on the effects of not persuing 
violations, you can effectively lose much of the value of your patent
not doing so.

This does not imply that the patent will become invalid, rather that
your ability to obtain a judgement in court will be hampered if you 
fail to inform / take action wrt violators.

Effectively a competitor may be able to practice your patent *until*
you inform them. probably without financial penalty. (That said, if
a court later finds that a violator of a patent undertook the violation
knowingly you're looking at treble-damages)

forrest

--
You have received this message because you are subscribed to the selinux list.
If you no longer wish to subscribe, send mail to majordomo@tycho.nsa.gov with
the words "unsubscribe selinux" without quotes as the message.

SE-Linux on SuSE

[JW]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Hello,

I am interested in running SE-Linux on SuSE.

I'd appreciate hearing from anyone who's tried it.

Esp. how hard/easy it was to install/configure, anything special you had to do to get it working, and what you like/dislike about it now that you have it working.

Thanks.
- -- 

- ----------------------------------------------------
Jonathan Wilson
System Administrator
Cedar Creek Software     http://www.cedarcreeksoftware.com
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org

iD8DBQE886w7Q5u80xXOLBcRAu2FAKCr7p8g97WTxT3d+M5fVSK5B5hupQCfWu+k
6BRs3lkJBbb9x3Se9q20wnw=
=IkW0
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


--
You have received this message because you are subscribed to the selinux list.
If you no longer wish to subscribe, send mail to majordomo@tycho.nsa.gov with
the words "unsubscribe selinux" without quotes as the message.

Re: SELinux Dumb Questions

[Russell Coker]

On Mon, 3 Jun 2002 16:50, Admissions Office wrote:
> Folks this may seem like a dumb question given the Open Source and postings
> on the site. Its just that we want to be sure....
>
> Is there any reason why a Colo company cannot offer SELinux as a standard
> product offering they would install on clients servers?

As Mark stated there are no license or legal issues preventing such use.

In fact SE Linux is very desirable as an option for a hosting company as it 
allows safer sharing of recources.  I believe that the requirements that JW 
plans to solve with SE Linux are along the lines of partitioning a server for 
several users (who don't necessarily trust each other and aren't trusted by 
the administrator) to bind to ports <1024.

Of course as a practical measure you probably want to offer a non-SE service 
too, people get paranoid when the NSA is mentioned and some customers will 
probably pay extra to have a dedicated server without NSA software rather 
than a shared server with the NSA software...

-- 
I do not get viruses because I do not use MS software.
If you use Outlook then please do not put my email address in your
address-book so that WHEN you get a virus it won't use my address in the
>From field.

--
You have received this message because you are subscribed to the selinux list.
If you no longer wish to subscribe, send mail to majordomo@tycho.nsa.gov with
the words "unsubscribe selinux" without quotes as the message.

Re: SELinux Dumb Questions

[JW]

> On Mon, 3 Jun 2002 16:50, Admissions Office wrote:
> > Folks this may seem like a dumb question given the Open Source and
> > postings on the site. Its just that we want to be sure....
> >
> > Is there any reason why a Colo company cannot offer SELinux as a standard
> > product offering they would install on clients servers?

> As Mark stated there are no license or legal issues preventing such use.


On Monday 03 June 2002 04:13 pm, Haigh, Tom wrote:
> SELinux includes Type Enforcement technology developed and patented by the
> Secure Computing Corporation, who still holds rights to all commercial use
> of the technology.  Before a colo company, or anyone else uses the
> technology commercially, it will be necessary to negotiate a license with
> Secure Computing.  If anyone wants to do so, I can help get the ball
> rolling with our Legal and BD folks.
>
> --Tom
>
> Dr. Tom Haigh, CTO
> Secure Computing Corp.
> 2675 Long Lake Road
> Roseville, MN 55113
>
> 651-628-2738 (V)
> 651-628-2701 (F)
>
> haigh@securecomputing.com
>
>

--
You have received this message because you are subscribed to the selinux list.
If you no longer wish to subscribe, send mail to majordomo@tycho.nsa.gov with
the words "unsubscribe selinux" without quotes as the message.

Re: SELinux Dumb Questions

[Russell Coker]

On Tue, 4 Jun 2002 23:30, JW wrote:
> > On Mon, 3 Jun 2002 16:50, Admissions Office wrote:
> > > Folks this may seem like a dumb question given the Open Source and
> > > postings on the site. Its just that we want to be sure....
> > >
> > > Is there any reason why a Colo company cannot offer SELinux as a
> > > standard product offering they would install on clients servers?
> >
> > As Mark stated there are no license or legal issues preventing such use.
>
> On Monday 03 June 2002 04:13 pm, Haigh, Tom wrote:
> > SELinux includes Type Enforcement technology developed and patented by
> > the Secure Computing Corporation, who still holds rights to all
> > commercial use of the technology.  Before a colo company, or anyone else
> > uses the technology commercially, it will be necessary to negotiate a
> > license with Secure Computing.  If anyone wants to do so, I can help get
> > the ball rolling with our Legal and BD folks.

Let's look at the following URL:
http://www.securecomputing.com/archive/press/2000/nsa_faq_secure_linux.html

> Question 6: Will SCC use its patent on Type Enforcement TM to restrict use,
> future development, derivative work, or release of the source code of the
> system? 
>
> There will be no restrictions on the use of TE by the Linux open source
> community. We believe that leveraging the resources of the Linux community
> is the best way to develop robust security for Linux.

That seems like a clear statement that we can do what we like with it!

But Tom, if your company does want to go ahead with this patent plan then 
please do the following:

1)  Change that misleading web page.

2)  Let me know so I can remove all SE Linux code from Debian, remove it from 
my client's machines, and start work on a competing product.

3)  Make formal statements as to limitations of distribution etc, also 
clarify to what extent you want SE Linux code removed from the world.  Should 
I get the upstream maintainer of stat to remove the SE Linux code too?  Also 
you'll have to get it removed from LSM which is under the GPL, and you had 
better hope that the problems with building as a module are fixed quickly - 
you can't ship code that links with the kernel unless it's under the GPL.

PS  When does the patent expire?  If it's due to expire in 1 year or less we 
can just wait until it's gone...

-- 
I do not get viruses because I do not use MS software.
If you use Outlook then please do not put my email address in your
address-book so that WHEN you get a virus it won't use my address in the
>From field.

--
You have received this message because you are subscribed to the selinux list.
If you no longer wish to subscribe, send mail to majordomo@tycho.nsa.gov with
the words "unsubscribe selinux" without quotes as the message.

Re: SELinux to GPL or not to GPL

[Admissions Office]

Ok - so how did all the work get done under the GPL? Where do things go from
here?
I mean we have all these smart people and work is now in the area of what
almost seems
like - "darn lawyers."   Hmmmmm..



> FYI, both Type Enforcement (TE) and Domain and Type Enforcement (DTE)
> are patented. Secure Computing Corp. patented TE, and TIS (Trusted
> Information Systems, now owned by Network Associates) patented DTE. The
> TE patent came first by several years. Lee Badger was one of the authors
> of the DTE patent.
>
> Crispin
>
> --
> Crispin Cowan, Ph.D.
> Chief Scientist, WireX Communications, Inc. http://wirex.com
> Security Hardened Linux Distribution:       http://immunix.org
> Available for purchase: http://wirex.com/Products/Immunix/purchase.html
>
>


--
You have received this message because you are subscribed to the selinux list.
If you no longer wish to subscribe, send mail to majordomo@tycho.nsa.gov with
the words "unsubscribe selinux" without quotes as the message.