State of the Kernel Self Protection Project
State of the Kernel Self Protection Project
Posted Sep 12, 2016 17:22 UTC (Mon) by PaXTeam (guest, #24616)In reply to: State of the Kernel Self Protection Project by pizza
Parent article: State of the Kernel Self Protection Project
you're wrong, there're many features in the kernel that i'm sure required even more time to get in shape (e.g., -rt, file systems, etc), second, this estimate isn't for a single particular feature but the ones i've heard people express an interest for.
> on a vanity project...
... that fundamentally influenced the entire industry to the point that you've been running code implementing my ideas for over a decade now. as for (not) being an investment, i'm not sure you realize but you're arguing against yourself and saying that i should have asked money from the get go (e.g., via patents, etc) instead of keeping it as a hobby that i gave away for free (gratis, in addition to libre).
> You're saying that you're not willing to put forth the effort to upstream things because it's a lot of work,
no, that's not what i'm saying. let me quote myself back, perhaps it'll sink the second time: not on my free time.
> while simultaneously complaining about those who do, and the efforts to document that ongoing work.
wait, are you saying that i should stop having an opinion just because it happens to be about my own code?
Posted Sep 12, 2016 17:53 UTC (Mon)
by pizza (subscriber, #46)
[Link] (3 responses)
As the saying goes, "Opinions are like a**holes. Everybody's got one and everyone thinks everyone else's stinks."
Posted Sep 13, 2016 10:25 UTC (Tue)
by sdalley (subscriber, #18550)
[Link] (2 responses)
The opinion of one who has, by the sweat of his brow, produced good working code, (for example, code in wide use by those who care about robust security-hardened kernels), will always be worth a lot more than the opinions of those who snipe from the sidelines.
Any of us would find continual criticism demoralizing. Why not try constructive praise?
Posted Sep 13, 2016 11:35 UTC (Tue)
by jubal (subscriber, #67202)
[Link] (1 responses)
Posted Sep 13, 2016 12:49 UTC (Tue)
by PaXTeam (guest, #24616)
[Link]
> Perhaps you should address this to the lovely and gentle folks of the PaX fame when they again decide
first of all, you're trying to judge characters based on a very small sample of interactions which i guess speaks volumes more about yourself, than us. hint: we've worked with various kernel and other developers just fine for as long as our projects existed. you can find the evidence on lkml, bugzillas, distro lists, etc. as far as i recall, the only topic that ended up in flamewars was about high level policy decisions (about the handling of security related issues), which represents a small fraction of the interaction of all participating sides.
as for 'talking down' the whole kernel community, it's of course nonsense (present the evidence if you think otherwise). we did and do criticize people who we find do something stupid and we don't mince words about that either, not unlike certain kernel (and non-kernel) developers by the way. you just have to learn to deal with it.
> You might also want to remind them, that they are not the sole authors of the whole kernel, and their contribution,
and why do we need to be reminded of this again? or was it just a strawman?
State of the Kernel Self Protection Project
State of the Kernel Self Protection Project
State of the Kernel Self Protection Project
The opinion of one who has, by the sweat of his brow, produced good working code, (for example, code in wide use by those who care about robust security-hardened kernels), will always be worth a lot more than the opinions of those who snipe from the sidelines.
Perhaps you should address this to the lovely and gentle folks of the PaX fame when they again decide that it's time to talk down the whole kernel community.
You might also want to remind them, that they are not the sole authors of the whole kernel, and their contribution, useful and needed as it is, is by far and large not the most important.
State of the Kernel Self Protection Project
> that it's time to talk down the whole kernel community.
> useful and needed as it is, is by far and large not the most important.