Linux 5.13 Reverts and Fixes the Problematic University of Minnesota Patches

KGIII

Super Moderator
Staff member
Gold Supporter
Joined
Jul 23, 2020
Messages
11,646
Reaction score
10,185
Credits
96,446


It's sad. I understand that they were doing research, but they should have talked to someone like Greg Kroah-Hartman or Linus Torvalds beforehand and secretly gotten permission for this.
 
Yeah, that's kinda an important point. Research requires consent, otherwise it's just abuse. We decided this not too long after WWII, for obvious reasons. It's a part of the Nuremberg Code[1}. Nobody has yet explained how it got by U of W's IRB.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuremberg_Code (see the very first of the 10 points)
 
Last edited:
Yeah, that's kinda an important point. Research requires consent, otherwise it's just abuse. We decided this not too long after WWII, for obvious reasons. It's a part of the Nuremberg Code[1}. Nobody has yet explained how it got by U of W's IRB.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuremberg_Code (see the very first of the 10 points)
Same goes for ethical hackers, they have to get permission before actually doing anything.
 
Same goes for ethical hackers, they have to get permission before actually doing anything.

That it passed IRB without pinging any alarms is still baffling me. It's literally the very first thing required for ethical research. If the research isn't ethical, it's abuse. This isn't specifically encoded into any major laws, but it's academic principle and has been since shortly after the end of WWII.

I spent a whole lot of time in academia. Indeed, I attended a couple of prestigious schools. I'd have been tossed from the school for experimenting on people without their permission. For all the people that say, "It's research!" It's not! Research requires the consent of the persons involved. Without that, it's abuse. It's a pretty clear line in the sand.

That there still aren't any firings, degrees withdrawn, etc. is not sitting well with me. Though the University may do so but opt to not publish their disciplinary actions for public consumption, I suppose.

Whoever thought this was a good idea needs to no longer be in academia, and I'm fine with that being multiple people. In fact, it probably should be multiple people. This sort of thing doesn't happen in a vacuum. It didn't happen without administrative permission.
 

Members online


Top