This seems like a pretty scummy way to do "research". I mean I understand that people in academia are becoming increasingly disconnected from the real world, but wow this is low. It's not that they're doing this, I'm sure they're not the first to think of this (for research or malicious reasons), but having the gall to brag about it is a new low.
“They introduce kernel bugs on purpose”
711–720 of 1001 posts
Re: “They introduce kernel bugs on purpose”
#712Re: “They introduce kernel bugs on purpose”
#713Once they clean out the garbage in the Comp Sci department and their research committee that approved this experiment, we can talk.
Re: “They introduce kernel bugs on purpose”
#714Re: “They introduce kernel bugs on purpose”
#715Re: “They introduce kernel bugs on purpose”
#716Some clarifications since they are unclear in the original report. - Aditya Pakki (the author who sent the new round of seemingly bogus patches) is not involved in the S&P 2021 research. This means Aditya is likely to have nothing to do with the prior round of patching attempts that led to the S&P 2021 paper. - According to the authors' clarification [1], the S&P 2021 paper did not introduce any bugs into Linux kerne…
Aditya's advisor [1] is one of the co-authors of the paper. He at least knew about this work and was very likely involved with it. [1] https://adityapakki.github.io/assets/files/aditya_cv.pdf
Re: “They introduce kernel bugs on purpose”
#717Re: “They introduce kernel bugs on purpose”
#718https://experts.umn.edu/en/organisations/confucius-institute
Re: “They introduce kernel bugs on purpose”
#719Re: “They introduce kernel bugs on purpose”
#720Me thinks that If you hold a degree from the University of Minnesota it would be a good idea to let your university know what you think of this.
Not a great selling point for the CS department. "Yes, we are banned from submitting patches to Linux due to past academic research and activities of our PhD students. However, we have a world-class program here."