Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.debian.security > #4836 > unrolled thread
| Started by | "Rebecca N. Palmer" <rebecca_palmer@zoho.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2016-05-22 00:40 +0200 |
| Last post | 2016-05-23 11:20 +0200 |
| Articles | 2 — 2 participants |
Back to article view | Back to linux.debian.security
This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by
below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.
Bug#791919: RFP: USBGuard -- protect your computer against rogue USB devices "Rebecca N. Palmer" <rebecca_palmer@zoho.com> - 2016-05-22 00:40 +0200
Bug#791919: RFP: USBGuard -- protect your computer against rogue USB devices Daniel Kopeček <dkopecek@redhat.com> - 2016-05-23 11:20 +0200
| From | "Rebecca N. Palmer" <rebecca_palmer@zoho.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-22 00:40 +0200 |
| Subject | Bug#791919: RFP: USBGuard -- protect your computer against rogue USB devices |
| Message-ID | <rBnIS-RZ-17@gated-at.bofh.it> |
Control: merge -1 813809 I'd also like to see this (or an equivalent: I'm not aware of any, but haven't looked much) in Debian, and am willing to try packaging it, but am not sure whether it's a good idea for a non-DD, non-security-specialist to maintain a security tool. It's in Fedora, with packaging [0] that looks fairly easy to translate to Debian (if that's legal - I don't know whether License: in a Fedora .spec means "including this packaging"); Tails are considering it [1]. A previous attempt to build a .deb package hit the build error [2]. [0] https://apps.fedoraproject.org/packages/usbguard/sources/spec [1] https://labs.riseup.net/code/issues/9569 [2] https://lists.debian.org/debian-mentors/2015/09/msg00116.html
[toc] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Daniel Kopeček <dkopecek@redhat.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-23 11:20 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <rBUbM-3YT-31@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #4836 |
Hello, On 05/22/2016 12:25 AM, Rebecca N. Palmer wrote: > Control: merge -1 813809 > > I'd also like to see this (or an equivalent: I'm not aware of any, but > haven't looked much) in Debian, and am willing to try packaging it, but > am not sure whether it's a good idea for a non-DD, > non-security-specialist to maintain a security tool. feel free to contact me if there are any issues with the upstream code w.r.t. packaging in Debian. I haven't packaged anything for Debian yet, so I won't be of much help in that area but I can try. > It's in Fedora, with packaging [0] that looks fairly easy to translate > to Debian (if that's legal - I don't know whether License: in a Fedora > .spec means "including this packaging"); What is the legal problem here? I think the default license for the .spec file is MIT: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing:Main?rd=Licensing#License_of_Fedora_SPEC_Files The upstream repository (which includes the .spec file too) is licensed under GPLv2+. That's probably an inconsistency that I should fix... Regards, -- Daniel Kopeček Software Engineer, Special Projects Red Hat, Inc.
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Back to top | Article view | linux.debian.security
csiph-web