Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

More awful IoT stuff

mjg59.dreamwidth.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–245 of 245 posts

Re: More awful IoT stuff

#241

Post by ashitlerferad »

Klathmon wrote: post #4

>It's running Linux and includes Busybox and dnsmasq, so plenty of GPLed code. I emailed the manufacturer asking for a copy and got told that they wouldn't give it to me, which is unsurprising but still disappointing. Has the GPL really lost it's power that much? I mean not responding to inquiries is one thing, but outright saying no?

The GPL is not and has never been magic pixie dust. Ensuring companies and people comply with it costs money thanks to the legal system. The folks at gpl-violations.org and Software Freedom Conservancy do a lot of good work bringing companies into compliance, including helping Linux developers to sue VMware for their infringing use of the Linux kernel.

https://sfconservancy.org/ http://gpl-violations.org/

Re: More awful IoT stuff

#242

Post by arantius »

Klathmon wrote: post #4

>It's running Linux and includes Busybox and dnsmasq, so plenty of GPLed code. I emailed the manufacturer asking for a copy and got told that they wouldn't give it to me, which is unsurprising but still disappointing. Has the GPL really lost it's power that much? I mean not responding to inquiries is one thing, but outright saying no?

You're only required to distribute sources if you modify them _and_ distribute the resulting binaries right? Is there any evidence that the busybox and/or dnsmasq binaries are anything besides the normal stock installation? The customization is in other binaries that need not necessarily be GPL it seems.

Re: More awful IoT stuff

#244

Post by jimktrains2 »

pandemicsyn wrote: post #121
jimktrains2 wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

TLS + Client Certs + EECDH+AESGCM:EDH+AESGCM:AES256+EECDH:AES256+EDH

You forgot to mention +[Vault|CFSSL|XYZ] for cert management.

I can find what CFSSL[1] and Vault[2] are, but not XYZ in this context.

Also, all of this can be done with plain openssl, there is no need for additional tools.

[1] https://blog.cloudflare.com/introducing-cfssl/ [2] https://www.vaultproject.io/intro/

Re: More awful IoT stuff

#245

Post by startling »

iofj wrote: post #229
startling wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I believe you can still sue for an injunction (e.g. to compel them to distribute copies of code as per the GPL).

Injunction is a way to prevent more damage from occurring. So generally speaking, injunctions : 1) are only available either during a trial or as a last resort (if you can make a good case the defendant won't pay even if the judge compels them) 2) you'd still have to prove more damage will be done if injunction isn't there. Those have to be real damages, with real monetary amounts on them. This is western law, it's p…

Thanks for clarifying!
Post reply on HN