The University of Minnesota’s and Engineering Department security researchers face intense scrutiny from the Linux community for intentionally trying to insert bugs into Linux patches. The buggy patches were a part of the research paper . The “As proof of concept, we take the Linux kernel as target OSS and safely demonstrate that it is practical for a malicious committer to introduce use-after-free bugs. Furthermore, we systematically measure and characterize the capabilities and opportunities of a malicious committee. At last, to of OSS, we propose mitigations against hypocrite commits, such as updating the code of conduct for OSS and developing tools for patch testing and verification.”
However, the experiment did not go over as planned and was poorly received by. Linux kernel maintainer Greg Kroah-Hartman , “Linux kernel developers do not like being experimented on; we have enough real work to do.” Jered Floyd, a member of Red Hat’s technical staff, agreed, : “This is worse than just being experimented upon; this is like saying you’re a “safety researcher” by going to a grocery store and cutting the brake lines on all the cars to see how many people crash when they leave. Enormously unethical.” As a result, Kroah-Hartman decided to ban the university from contributing to the in the future. “Our community does not appreciate being experimented on and being
“tested” by submitting available patches that either do nothing on purpose or introduce bugs. If you wish to do work like this, I suggest you find a different community to run your experiments on; you are not welcome here,” he . “I will now have to ban all future contributions from your University and rip out your previous contributions, as they were submitted in bad faith to cause problems.”
The UMN Department of computer science and Engineering published an open letter to the Linux community apologizing for its mistakes. “We sincerely apologize for any harm our did to the Linux kernel community. Our goal was to them, and we are very sorry that the method used in the “hypocrite commits” paper was inappropriate. As many observers have pointed out to us, we made a mistake by not finding a way to consult with the and obtain permission before running this study; we did that because we knew we could not ask the maintainers of Linux for permission, or they would be on the lookout for the hypocrite patches. While our goal was to improve the security of Linux, we now understand that it was hurtful to the community to make it a subject of our research and to waste its effort reviewing these patches without its knowledge or permission,” the letter .
In another letter obtained by , Linux Foundation’s senior vice president and general manager of projects, Mike Dolan, asked the researchers to “identify all proposals of known-vulnerable code from any U of MN experiment. The information should include the name of each targeted software, the commit information, the purported name of the proposer, email address, date/time, subject, and code so that all can quickly identify such proposals and potentially take remedial action. For such experiments.”