Re: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3

Alexandre Oliva
2007-06-18T21:45:40Z

On Jun 18, 2007, david@lang.hm wrote:

> On Mon, 18 Jun 2007, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>> On Jun 18, 2007, david@lang.hm wrote:
>>
>>> they want to prevent anyone from modifying the credit card machine to
>>> store copies of all the card info locally.
>>
>> I see. Thanks for enlightening me.
>>
>>> you don't really answer this issue. since these boxes are required to
>>> be sealed and physically anti-tamper, changing the ROM is not
>>> acceptable.
>>
>> Given the ROM exception in GPLv3, I guess you could seal and
>> anti-tamper it as much as you want, and leave the ROM at such a place
>> in which it's easily replaceable but with signature checking and all
>> such that the user doesn't install ROM that is not authorized by you.

> 'sealed, but easy to replace ROM containing the programming' is a
> contridiction.

> if a local person can easily replace the programming it doesn't meet
> the PCI requirements and therefor you just cannot use GPLv3 code for
> this sort of application.

How can someone easily replace the programming if there's signature
checking and all?

The sealing of the ROMmed software is accomplished by other means, but
it's there. I shall mention that I'm not endorsing or recommending
this practice, it might very well be copyright infringement even under
GPLv1 and v2.

--
Alexandre Oliva http://www.lsd.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/
FSF Latin America Board Member http://www.fsfla.org/
Red Hat Compiler Engineer aoliva@{redhat.com, gcc.gnu.org}
Free Software Evangelist oliva@{lsd.ic.unicamp.br, gnu.org}