Privacy

2366 readers

180 users here now

Icon base by Lorc under CC BY 3.0 with modifications to add a gradient

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

Ategon@programming.dev

danielintempesta@programming.dev

GrapheneOS: Another contributor attacked & banned by Daniel Micay (tech.michaelaltfield.net)

submitted 1 week ago by maltfield@monero.town to c/privacy@programming.dev

56 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Why was I banned from GrapheneOS? That’s a good question.


Why I was banned from GrapheneOS by Daniel Micay)

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] wildbus8979@sh.itjust.works 12 points 1 week ago (20 children)

Yeah strcat has been an ass since the Copperhead days. He's set back Linux security at least a decade by pissing off Spender of GRsecurity to the point of making him remove the public patches (not that I think Spender was right to do that, but I understand why it happened after what Mackay did).

The dude is toxic.

[–] Skorp@sh.itjust.works -2 points 1 week ago (10 children)

That information you posted about Spender and GRsecurity is false. That isn't why the patches were removed. The project is in good standing and contact with Spender.

Also, your comment about crashing and burning the Copperhead project is blatantly false as well. The other business partner attempted a hostile takeover that was rebuffed.

This blog post that they have posted across the fediverse, and multiple other platforms is a near complete fabrication of the timeline and what actually occurred. Anyone who has gone to GitHub to look at it has found that maltfield's claims are baseless and they are acting inappropriate childish and unacceptable manner.

You are just saying things without a shred of proof and no one is asking for any. So here I am: Please provide proof of all of these claims.

[–] bombadil@programming.dev 5 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

You are just saying things without a shred of proof

Likewise.

Please provide proof of all of these claims.

[–] Skorp@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 week ago

Here is the information about Spender and GRsecurity copied from my other post:

It was after GRsecurity became private that they had an issue with people making upstream security contributions, particularly upstreaming anything from the GRsecurity patches. They had disagreements about that, and then moved past it and are on good terms now.

It's absolutely ridiculous to claim that Micay has anything to do with them making things private.

https://grsecurity.net/announce https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10126319

It was Wind River, owned by Intel, which was the main offender for upstreaming the patches. Micay was the one who introduced GRsecurity in Arch Linux and did all the integration it had for PaX exceptions and the start of RBAC support (systemd was an issue at the time). It was afterwards once it became private that it was awkward because they didn't want people upstreaming or maintaining ports of their work but at the time Micay was maintaining GRsecurity in Arch Linux and GrapheneOS (then called CopperheadOS) was using the PaX subset for kernel hardening, so there were existing uses of it to try to keep going in some way.

load more comments (8 replies)

load more comments (17 replies)