TCFS for FreeBSD?
Brett Glass
file system for a group of FreeBSD machines.
--Brett Glass
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majo...@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-security" in the body of the message
David G. Andersen
Been running it here, very stably, for almost two years. Great stuff.
-Dave
Brett Glass just mooed:
--
work: d...@lcs.mit.edu me: d...@pobox.com
MIT Laboratory for Computer Science http://www.angio.net/
I do not accept unsolicited commercial email. Do not spam me.
Brett Glass
by DARPA.) Can't use it -- both by policy and for practical reasons (we can't
fix bugs ourselves because we can't look at the code).
--Brett
David G. Andersen
> Just checked, and it's GPLed. (Which it shouldn't be, because it is sponsored
> by DARPA.) Can't use it -- both by policy and for practical reasons (we can't
> fix bugs ourselves because we can't look at the code).
Please don't turn this into a religious discussion.
But to respond to a factual error in your message: Our DARPA program
managers are content with us GPL'ing code. An important part of
DARPA sponsorship is tech transfer to both civilian and military
applications. The GPL and BSD licenses, as well as not releasing
the code and creating a startup, are all viewed as good ways for
taking sponsored research and making something useful out of it.
The important part is that it gets out there and improves the state
of technology.
I don't care what your politics are, but don't spread incorrect
information.
This discussion is now quite off-topic for -security. This is my
last message.
-Dave
--
work: d...@lcs.mit.edu me: d...@pobox.com
MIT Laboratory for Computer Science http://www.angio.net/
I do not accept unsolicited commercial email. Do not spam me.
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majo...@FreeBSD.org
pgreen
Brett Glass
>Wait, you can't look at the code? Is it too bright, blinding, or what?
Looking at GPLed code puts programmers at risk of lawsuits claiming that
anything similar to it which they later produce is derivative -- and
therefore must later be licensed under the GPL and given away for free.
Brett Glass
> But to respond to a factual error in your message: Our DARPA program
>managers are content with us GPL'ing code. An important part of
>DARPA sponsorship is tech transfer to both civilian and military
>applications.
Exactly.
>The GPL and BSD licenses, as well as not releasing
>the code and creating a startup, are all viewed as good ways for
>taking sponsored research and making something useful out of it.
The GPL makes the code useless to commercial software developers and
therefore does not satisfy that goal.
Now, to return to the topic at hand: Does anyone know of an
encrypted file system for FreeBSD which is licensed under a truly
free, non-viral license?
--Brett Glass
pgreen
Copyright (C) 2002 Phil Green
This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify
it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by
the Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of the License, or
(at your option) any later version.
This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the
GNU General Public License for more details.
You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License
along with this program; if not, write to the Free Software
Foundation, Inc., 59 Temple Place, Suite 330, Boston, MA 02111-1307 USA
#include <stdio.h>
int main(void)
{
int n;
for (n = 0; n < 100; n++)
{
printf("I made Brett Glass look at GPLd code!");
}
return 0;
}
On Mon, 14 Oct 2002, Brett Glass wrote:
jason perkins
> fear_monger_straightener -- detect fear mongers
> Copyright (C) 2002 Phil Green
>
> This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify
> it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by
> the Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of the License, or
> (at your option) any later version.
>
> This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
> but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
> MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the
> GNU General Public License for more details.
>
> You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License
> along with this program; if not, write to the Free Software
> Foundation, Inc., 59 Temple Place, Suite 330, Boston, MA 02111-1307
USA
>
> #include <stdio.h>
>
> int main(void)
> {
> int n;
>
> for (n = 0; n < 100; n++)
> {
> printf("I made Brett Glass look at GPLd code!");
> }
>
> return 0;
> }
Just so long as you don't include "AFAIK" or "as far as i know" in your posts
and fun afoul of Brett's trademarks:
oops.
--
Jason Perkins
<http://www.somebodydial911.com/>
Chris BeHanna
> > [...GPL flame bait snipped...]
>
> Just so long as you don't include "AFAIK" or "as far as i know" in your posts
> and fun afoul of Brett's trademarks:
>
> <http://www.ymmv.com/tm.html>
According to http://www.uspto.gov , they aren't Brett's (or anyone
else's) trademarks.
Should anyone attempt to trademark them, it should be a trivial
exercise to demonstrate that they are or were in common use prior
to the attempt.
The discussion of whether or not reading GPL'd code creates an
intellectual property "contamination" issue requiring the use of
"clean room" techniques to insulate a company from a lawsuit by the FSF
is off-topic. It's important, to be sure, but it's off-topic.
Regards,
--
Chris BeHanna http://www.pennasoft.com
Principal Consultant
PennaSoft Corporation
ch...@pennasoft.com
Rob Andrews
Mark,
Would you please take the time to remind the persons involved
on this thread of why it was you reposted this lists guidelines
to everyone on the list.
Once again, the inital question was on topic and even one of
the responses.. But per normal for one of the persons, it was
turned into an offtopic and inappropriate dialog for this list.
--
Rob Andrews
RELI Networks, Inc.
Marietta, GA.
Greg Lewis
> Has TCFS been ported to FreeBSD? I'm looking for a good encrypted network
> file system for a group of FreeBSD machines.
>
> --Brett Glass
I've got a partial port against -STABLE, but obviously as I'm using the
word partial its not complete :). The kernel portion is mostly done,
except that its not linking (something to do with how I use MALLOC_DECLARE
judging by the linker errors). I haven't started the userland portions,
but should the kernel side actually work by some minor miracle once the
linker problem was resolved then that shouldn't be too much of a problem.
--
Greg Lewis Email : gle...@eyesbeyond.com
Eyes Beyond Web : http://www.eyesbeyond.com
Information Technology FreeBSD : gle...@FreeBSD.org
Greg Lewis
> May I help? I'd like to be able to use it, so long as it
> has not been GPLed. (I haven't checked to see whether the
> maintainers, who are Linux-oriented, GPLed the code they
> added to it.)
Well, the code I ported is from OpenBSD, and the copyright in the relevant
files is BSD style. I also used some KAME code to add some crypto
functionality, but that again is BSD licensed. I actually fixed my
link errors last night, so now I have a kernel with TCFS support
compiled in. I haven't yet tried to boot it, so I'm going to try that
next and also try and get the userland utilities compiling. I can
send you the kernel diffs if you like. Note that this is the first
kernel project I've tried, so I'd be very surprised if it actually
worked first time. A crash box is probably the best thing to test
it on :).
Just tell me what part you'd like to be involved in and I'll try and
provide what I have of the code so far :). Others who are interested
are also welcome to what there is so far.
Greg Lewis
> I was under the impression that TCFS, like CFS, operated entirely
> in userspace. What parts of it work down at the kernel level?
Its a filesystem that works in the kernel much like ufs, etc. That
is, it has a standard vfsops definitions and associated functions.
All the BSD code on the TCFS site and that in OpenBSD is like this.
I don't know if maybe on Linux its implemented in user space since
I haven't looked at the Linux code.
> Also, what did you bring in from KAME? (I would think that the
> necessary crypto would be available through the OpenSSL libraries.)
Right, except OpenSSL isn't linked into the kernel :). The kernel
crypto parts that -STABLE doesn't have are the blowfish and DES
block encryption code. The code itself is originally from OpenSSL
or SSLeay by the looks of it.
> Since you've already worked heavily on the kernel stuff, I should
> probably focus on the userland utilities to avoid having to come
> up the learning curve when you're already there.
Actually, I don't know a lot about either kernel workings or
filesystems, I just wanted to try and port TCFS :). That said,
I've just checked and the user utilities aren't in my tree,
so I'll try and track them down (I must have them somewhere :).
Mark Murray
> > necessary crypto would be available through the OpenSSL libraries.)
>
> Right, except OpenSSL isn't linked into the kernel :). The kernel
> crypto parts that -STABLE doesn't have are the blowfish and DES
> block encryption code. The code itself is originally from OpenSSL
> or SSLeay by the looks of it.
There is a new (kernel) crypto susbsystem that Sam Leffler has committed
to current. He wants to commit it to stable as well, and I think he'll
be allowed to. It is the OpenBSD system, and it supports hardware crypto
accelerators. Its very good.
M
--
o Mark Murray
\_
O.\_ Warning: this .sig is umop ap!sdn