Follow @Openwall on Twitter for new release announcements and other news
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2017 07:05:16 -0600
From: Jonathan Corbet <>
To: Brad Spengler <>
Cc: Kees Cook <>, ""
Subject: Re: Stop the plagiarism

On Sun, 4 Jun 2017 07:43:21 -0400
Brad Spengler <> wrote:

> > this LWN article being published. And as I already said, it's not
> > misattributed. You're just willfully misreading it.  
> Clearly based on other comments other people found it misleading as well --
> perhaps you are just in denial about how damaging this kind of stuff is?
> As was mentioned there, you properly credited it, but others misattributed
> it to you.  It'd be as if I backported an ext4 encryption patch, and then
> LWN writes an article about "my" implementation and "my" code and "my" work.
> You don't find that misleading at all?  Assuming you had seen the article,
> would you have corrected it yourself, or would you act in the same way as
> you've demonstrated with every other misattribution and misleading marketing
> that benefits you and the KSPP and ignore it, expecting it to magically
> resolve itself?  Because going forward those kinds of lies and damaging
> claims are going to be resolved with lawsuits. 

Given that you're so concerned with attribution, it seems a little
strange that you're trying to blame Kees for an LWN article.  He had
nothing to do with it; I wouldn't be surprised to learn that he'd rather
it had never been written. The responsibility for that article lies with
the author and, ultimately, with me for choosing to publish it.  You know
where to find me; talk to me if you are unhappy with our work.

For the record, I believe the article does attribute the work correctly.
Could it have been done better?  Almost certainly so.  Future articles in
this area will receive the sort of extra attention we reserve for a small
list of land-mine topics that always explode when we tread near them.  We
will try to ensure that you'll have nothing to complain about in that
area, though I doubt we'll be able to improve your low opinion of us in

What we will not do, though, is ignore the credit for the substantial
work of making these patches upstreamable and dealing with the process to
get them merged — the work you have explicitly chosen not to do.  It is
not an easy job to get this work upstream, and, by the time it happens,
the result is not solely your work.


Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.