Live data from Hacker News

Open letter from researchers involved in the “hypocrite commit” debacle

lore.kernel.org

21–30 of 384 posts

Re: Open letter from researchers involved in the “hypocrite commit” debacle

#21
post #2

I'd like to give them the benefit of the doubt, but this is written like an apology they know they must write . It does not come across as apologetic. It comes across as rationalization veiled as an apology, and it doesn't sit well with me. I hope I'm just being overly sensitive here.

> It does not come across as apologetic.

The words are there. It's not up to us to decide if they're "genuine". No one's a mindreader.

The tendency to view apologies as fake seems more often to reflect how harshly we view the one making it.

Re: Open letter from researchers involved in the “hypocrite commit” debacle

#22
post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Indeed. This letter is an attempt to justify and rationalise their actions. Essentially, it amounts to saying "we're sorry you were offended and felt hurt by our legitimate work but we had no choice but to lie to you and unethically experiment on you without your consent or we wouldn't have been able to do it". Their statement is not an actual apology, even if it is phrased in the language of apology, and it is an ex…

Just curious, and I'm genuinely asking as someone who thought the letter seemed well-intentioned: what should they have put in the apology letter?

They should have addressed why the kernel maintainers felt the way they do. As it is now they are trying to rationalize their actions instead of showing they have made an attempt to understand why their research was questionable.

Re: Open letter from researchers involved in the “hypocrite commit” debacle

#24
I really appreciate the apology and as they stated, its unconditional nature. Good.

However, I find something very problematic. This quote shows it:

"We have learned some important lessons about research with the open source community from this incident."

This is something I don't like. This is not something about "research with the open source community". If anything, they should have learned something about treating human beings as persons and not as involuntary guinea pigs. They should have learned something about not breaking anyone's (not only any open source community) good faith and trust, and respecting that.

They behaved like jerks and they still cannot see that.

Re: Open letter from researchers involved in the “hypocrite commit” debacle

#26
post #10
post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was just about to post: "This is a great apology." Context is everything, of course. I think you're right that it's tainted by the fact that they absolutely did not have a choice, and coming from people who've deceived the same tribes they're now trying to apologize to.

And what of the merits? If the previous 190 patches were indeed legitimate it strikes me as overly vengeful to pull them in a "punish the son for the sins of the father and the father for the sins of the son" kind of way.

Or it's not in vengeance, but caution after the researchers have demonstrated that they put their needs above the community's. When the presumption of innocence is lost, it's appropriate to revert the patches until they are known to be good.

ETA: GKH on reverting the patches[1]

> This patchset has the "easy" reverts, there are 68 remaining ones that need to be manually reviewed. Some of them are not able to be reverted as they already have been reverted, or fixed up with follow-on patches as they were determined to be invalid. Proof that these submissions were almost universally wrong.

[1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20210421130105.1226686-1-gregkh...

Re: Open letter from researchers involved in the “hypocrite commit” debacle

#27
post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Indeed. This letter is an attempt to justify and rationalise their actions. Essentially, it amounts to saying "we're sorry you were offended and felt hurt by our legitimate work but we had no choice but to lie to you and unethically experiment on you without your consent or we wouldn't have been able to do it". Their statement is not an actual apology, even if it is phrased in the language of apology, and it is an ex…

Just curious, and I'm genuinely asking as someone who thought the letter seemed well-intentioned: what should they have put in the apology letter?

> We are sorry for the harm we've caused by our unethical experimentation involving members of the Linux community. In accordance with community standards and a desire to avoid benefiting from our ethical failure, we have requested the immediate retraction of the papers and other published work resulting from this unethical experimentation. We are also working together with our institutional leadership to address the systemic and individual failings which permitted this unethical research to take place. As a result of this, we will publicly prepare a report regarding the actions taken and potential systemic changes which will ensure these actions do not reoccur and further harm is not caused. Out of an abundance of caution and because experience has shown our judgement, as is, to be questionable, no further research similar in nature to the research in question will be undertaken by this institution or these researchers until proper community consultation has taken place regarding the report and proposed changes to systemic review are implemented. Once again, we take full responsibility for any harm we have caused and we will work to ensure that such harm never occurs again. We hope that, at some point, we may regain your trust and confidence and, if you'll permit us, to work alongside you.

[signed personally, by every involved researcher, professor, IRB member, and all of the relevant university leadership including the board]

Something like that would do nicely, in my opinion. Then they'd have to absolutely follow through on it. Ideally, they'd also ask involved members of the community so harmed, among other experts, to independently review and watch the process to ensure no further harm is being done, progress is made, and public accountability is kept.

Re: Open letter from researchers involved in the “hypocrite commit” debacle

#28
> As many observers have pointed out to us, we made a mistake by not finding a way to consult with the community 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.

This shows one thing to me, clearly, they still don't understand how such studies are conducted. not authorized penetration testing is illegal, to a very large degree.

For example, as far I understand, and as many pointed out; you get permission from members for an study without specifying time or any details of a study, then conduct study in 6 month.

Re: Open letter from researchers involved in the “hypocrite commit” debacle

#29
post #2

I'd like to give them the benefit of the doubt, but this is written like an apology they know they must write . It does not come across as apologetic. It comes across as rationalization veiled as an apology, and it doesn't sit well with me. I hope I'm just being overly sensitive here.

> It does not come across as apologetic. The words are there. It's not up to us to decide if they're "genuine". No one's a mindreader. The tendency to view apologies as fake seems more often to reflect how harshly we view the one making it.

Their opening statement has the most classic of all non-apology tactics: "We're sorry for any harm we caused". Maybe this wasn't their intent, but this is one of the oldest "say the words without having to mean anything" tactics in the book.

It's like telling your partner "I'm sorry if I hurt you". No, you hurt them. Apologize for hurting them.

Post reply on HN