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

EU study recommends OpenBSD

undeadly.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 153 posts

Re: EU study recommends OpenBSD

#21

Post by nnq »

s_dev wrote: post #16
belorn wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"said the great problem we would face is that companies would take our BSD code, modify it, and not give back. − Nope. We have many companies giving us code back, all the time." - Theo De Raadt

You could have easily taken the full quote -- it's not quite the contradiction you're trying to make: "GPL fans said the great problem we would face is that companies would take our BSD code, modify it, and not give back. Nope—the great problem we face is that people would wrap the GPL around our code, and lock us out in the same way that these supposed companies would lock us out. Just like the Linux community, we h…

> once the code is GPL'd, we cannot get it back

I don't get it. Can't you retain copyright to code you yourself release under GPL and also use it under a different license or as part of closes source software? As far as I know, you can...

Re: EU study recommends OpenBSD

#22

Post by cbd1984 »

andrewstuart2 wrote: post #12
cbd1984 wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, and a Brinks armored truck is just as vulnerable to carjackings as a Ford Pinto, we just don't know about the vulnerability because nobody drives them. People were saying the same things about Linux. In the late 1990s and early 2000s. By which time Linux had already become the de-facto go-to OS for web servers around the world. It was, in short, already a high-value target, and yet the apocalypse didn't occur.

Of course that's true. I'm just not convinced that OpenBSD : Linux :: Armored truck : Pinto. In fact, the point of a good portion of the second study [1], p.17-25 is pointing out the flaws that have occurred in the Linux operating system and other existing technologies. [1] http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2015/52740...

I never claimed Linux was a Pinto. My point is, some things are just built well, and even if they're not used very often we can expect a certain level of quality, as opposed to saying that the only reason we don't see them stolen is because so few people drive them. Especially if they're used all the damn time, just not in places people see a lot.

So some bugs will be found in OpenBSD. That's a given. However, it isn't like OpenBSD is never used, or that the people who made it are bad programmers.

Re: EU study recommends OpenBSD

#23

Post by th0br0 »

ersii wrote: post #19
th0br0 wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In general, the EU is _very_ strong on open source commitments. Almost all projects that I know of and some of which I'm working on funded as part of FP7 (Seventh Framework Programme) will eventually end up open-sourced.

Interesting! Could you elaborate some more and perhaps list a few projects, if you're allowed to?

I primarily know about the projects listed at https://www.fokus.fraunhofer.de/809f10db25eddf3e/projects A personal observation is that, nowadays, gitlab seems to be preferred to github as part of a push to rely more on software developed inside the EU (guess it's an aftermath of the whole NSA story).

PolicyCompass, for example, lives at https://github.com/policycompass

Carneades lives at http://github.com/carneades

MARKOS is up on SF http://markosproject.sourceforge.net/

Re: EU study recommends OpenBSD

#24

Post by SixSigma »

tbrownaw wrote: post #18
jkyle wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Theo De Raadt always complained that many of the institutions that run and use OpenBSD don't contribute back. Sounds like he needs a different license then.

I don't think any of the free/open licenses require users to contribute to the parent project. I don't think any even require that people distributing modified versions, send those modifications back upstream.

In fact there was a shitstorm when some licences had "all modifications must be sent upstream" clauses e.g. Plan9's original license had that clause. And then the "tick this box if you don't make nuclear weapons" clause was lambasted in Theo's colourful style [1]. There was a time when OpenBSD were considering moving to the plan9 tool chain - which is now available under both GPL and MIT licensing.

That sad part was, most everyone in the plan9 community agreed with him but had their hands tied by Alacatel/Lucent legal and US law.

[1] https://groups.google.com/forum/?_escaped_fragment_=topic/co...

Re: EU study recommends OpenBSD

#27

Post by Someone1234 »

tbrownaw wrote: post #18
jkyle wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Theo De Raadt always complained that many of the institutions that run and use OpenBSD don't contribute back. Sounds like he needs a different license then.

I don't think any of the free/open licenses require users to contribute to the parent project. I don't think any even require that people distributing modified versions, send those modifications back upstream.

The GPL kinda-sorta does. I guess it depends on your definition of "contribute back." People that derive from GPL source have to release those changes to the public, which could just be a zip archive on their web-site rather than a git pull request.

I guess what I mean is, the company can try to be as unhelpful as possible (e.g. strip comments, place all code into a giant .cpp file, etc) but it does technically have to publish source code regardless.

Re: EU study recommends OpenBSD

#28

Post by javert »

s_dev wrote: post #2

Theo De Raadt always complained that many of the institutions that run and use OpenBSD don't contribute back. Good to see the EU at least acknowledging that its something that they should explore. They probably use it and its features more than they realise. I suspect there is a strong political motive as well behind being "technologically independent" after the NSA mass surveillance revelations. I like the sound of…

> an EU BSD fork

Why fork it? That is completely stupid. Do you want to have the EU version of North Korea's Red Star Linux? Do you want to make it so Google doesn't work properly on EU BSD?

Re: EU study recommends OpenBSD

#29

Post by nbevans »

"[...] the use of open source computer operating systems and applications reduces the risk of privacy intrusion by mass surveillance. Open source software is not error free, or less prone to errors than proprietary software, the experts write. But proprietary software does not allow constant inspection and scrutiny by a large community of experts."

That worked great for OpenSSL didn't it? ;)

Re: EU study recommends OpenBSD

#30

Post by jkyle »

joshuapants wrote: post #13
jkyle wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Theo De Raadt always complained that many of the institutions that run and use OpenBSD don't contribute back. Sounds like he needs a different license then.

I don't think that would make them likely to contribute back, they'd just use something else. He'd rather have selfish people using good software than choosing to use something inferior.

Maybe, maybe not. They'd all do the same sort of cost/benefit assessment and if they deemed the benefit to outweigh the cost of contributing back they would do it.

There'd be some who would change their options and some that would become contributors. Hard to say how it would pan out.

But, when you select a license like BSD (which I've done myself) you shouldn't complain when users don't contribute back.

You selected a license that formally declares your intent and expectations; the user has formally agreed to them.

Post reply on HN