this post was submitted on 22 Oct 2024
442 points (98.0% liked)

Linux

48012 readers
617 users here now

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).

Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.

Rules

Related Communities

Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] BCsven@lemmy.ca 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

i don't know what exactly was in question in the kernel, that the lawyers had to worry about, but From EAR rules... "note that open source software can still be subject to export control measures if it includes technologies or functionalities that are regulated. In such cases, specific controls may be applied to prevent the unauthorized export of these technologies or functionalities."

IF something was deemed controlled, it makes sense to pull it so kernel can ship anywhere, and whomever received it can do their own tweaks

[–] nanook@friendica.eskimo.com 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

@BCsven @Allero Given the modular nature of the kernel, the module can always be made available separately those today's Internet really makes such restrictions, as they apply to software, moot.

[–] BCsven@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Exactly. Not much different than a distro that can't legally ship non-free drivers for initial instal due to licensing, but you load them in yourself on first boot

[–] nanook@friendica.eskimo.com 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

@BCsven As I stated though moot, the laws have really outlived their usefulness. There are simply too many unsecured systems on the Internet to make it impossible for a bad foreign actor to gain access to any software that is not intended for export. When I worked for the local telco, many of their switches had dial-in modems that connected to the recent change channels, the channels that allow you to alter how lines were assigned, telephone calls were routed, etc, without so much as a login or password. If you knew the commands you could do pretty much anything you wanted to. I caused a major meltdown that got me an unwanted interview with directors merely for suggesting that they put a password on the root account of a pbx interface Unix system used to serve a 40,000 line customer. So yea security is mostly a joke and as a result these laws serve no useful purpose.

[–] BCsven@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

Oh I get the futility of it. But if you are in the USA you are bound by it. Same reason encryption devs had to cross to Canada to do development because USA would not allow encryption code shared across boundaries. Or how I once sent a software bug report in for an Engineering product; because company is USA based they assigned it an ITAR /EAR status. It was a 4" cube I modelled, and now some dev has to treat it as sensitive EAR data. LOL