11–20 of 271 posts
It was interesting to hear a lead story on the nightly news talking about data privacy issues related to where the data was stored, saying that the data would be stored on “American company Amazon’s Servers”. No mention of Australian regions or GovCloud etc.
They also said location would not be used, but
android.permission.ACCESS_FINE_LOCATION
I saw this coming BUT I thought if they were clever they might get the code from the Singapore government (Who I think developed OpenTrace) direct? You can release you code as GPL. But you can also release you code however, separately if you want. Also it depends on OpenTrace's libraries and if it's been contributed to.
Uhm, no. Once your code contains GPL code that is not yours , it has to be GPL. Particularly in v3, where a number of loopholes were closed. You are free to attach further non-conflicting clauses to it, but the GPL of the original code must be respected. That’s the entire point of the GPL. Double-licensing requires you to have ownership of the entire codebase. At that point, you are licensing everything , so you’re f…
OP meant Singapore can dual license.
I saw this coming BUT I thought if they were clever they might get the code from the Singapore government (Who I think developed OpenTrace) direct? You can release you code as GPL. But you can also release you code however, separately if you want. Also it depends on OpenTrace's libraries and if it's been contributed to.
Uhm, no. Once your code contains GPL code that is not yours , it has to be GPL. Particularly in v3, where a number of loopholes were closed. You are free to attach further non-conflicting clauses to it, but the GPL of the original code must be respected. That’s the entire point of the GPL. Double-licensing requires you to have ownership of the entire codebase. At that point, you are licensing everything , so you’re f…
But to be honest, as an Aussie I don't think our government is remotely competent enough to have considered the copyright license of the code they were using. There were initial reports they would provide the source code of the application, but these promises were quickly revoked for reasons of "national security" or some other such rubbish.
EDIT: I meant to say that it was a bullshit reason such as "national security", not that it was a direct quote. The actual reason they claimed was that it was easier to hack if the source code was public.
> Non-compliant. The CovidSAFE application heavily uses source code from https://github.com/opentrace-community/opentrace-android which was released under GPL v3 That's not to say its non-compliant, they could have reached out to the (one) contributor and licenced it separately.
Or they could have GPLed the entire app; no reason not to have.
It was interesting to hear a lead story on the nightly news talking about data privacy issues related to where the data was stored, saying that the data would be stored on “American company Amazon’s Servers”. No mention of Australian regions or GovCloud etc.
As far as I know none of them has a background in computer science or anything related to software development. At least a third of the group immediately said that the won't install the app exactly for the “American company Amazon’s Servers” reason.
I hadn't researched into the topic but I tried to offer an alternative explanation to why those choices were made, but I felt that nobody was even slightly interested in why it might not be as evil as they have been made to think it is.
From irresponsible journalism to untrustworthy governments with hidden agenda, there are too many things that I think lead to people making uninformed decisions. Just throwing this opinion out there because it's something that has been on my mind for a long while, and perhaps something that may resonate with someone else.
Edit: typo (explain --> offer).
They said they would release source, but they've distributed the app first, so are in breach. They also said location would not be used, but android.permission.ACCESS_FINE_LOCATION Can't trust them on things that can be checked; therefore can't trust them on the things that that can't be checked.
"Some, if not all, of the app’s source code will be made public."
I would assume many GPL-licensed applications are GPL non-compliant. From a user's perspective, what are the most relevant problems when this is the case? (Excluding problems of philosophical nature that only free software geeks care about. No intention to be disrespectful; but the more practical the problems, the more likely it is that ordinary users can relate to them.)
I'm not sure what you mean by philosophical vs practical. The problem is past that point and is really is not related to either of those, it's a legal problem: a user wants the source code, the license says they're entitled to receive it, but the distributor is violating the license by refusing to provide it to the user. Or at least that was my read anyway.
> Non-compliant. The CovidSAFE application heavily uses source code from https://github.com/opentrace-community/opentrace-android which was released under GPL v3 That's not to say its non-compliant, they could have reached out to the (one) contributor and licenced it separately.
It was interesting to hear a lead story on the nightly news talking about data privacy issues related to where the data was stored, saying that the data would be stored on “American company Amazon’s Servers”. No mention of Australian regions or GovCloud etc.
The ABC is reporting that the server must store data in Australia and the data cannot be transferred overseas.
The feds have been at pains to present COVIDSafe as having stringent privacy safeguards, but they have such an appalling record that few will believe them without trustworthy independent scrutiny. I can't see how that can be possible until (at a bare minimum) the app's source code is released.
I really hope they do, and that they make any necessary improvements subsequently recommended. Contact tracing is a fantastic potential use of mobile technology. It would be a pity for it to be undermined by the usual impulse towards contemptuous patrician secrecy.