Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is the kind of issue that causes all that government bloat... If I was a state employee and I wrote the app, and I had to release the source code, then I'm making it very easy for a bad actor to find a vulnerability and exploit it to leak the data of citizens. One might respond: "Well software shouldn't have those holes! Just because it's closed source, doesn't mean that won't happen anyway Also true, in an idea…
> However security by obscurity is a layer of defense... In your example it would be the layer of defense. But then we still have to wonder who is the attacker? The assumption made on the web page is that the developer is the attacker. The obscurity then becomes a major issue rather than the defense. Yes, we will have to pay what it costs and we will have to add extra developers. We all know the difference? I could w…
Public Money, Public Code
111–120 of 216 posts
Re: Public Money, Public Code
#112I am more interested in public government code being shared with other EU countries. EU funds a lot of government software projects , but they never end up becoming EU-wide projects. EU is all about enabling common standards across countries. And what better way to enforce them than by using common software across the EU states.
Re: Public Money, Public Code
#113Earlier quoted context omitted.
When I've done freelance work and have been able to write the contract, I include a clause that the client receives "a perpetual, worldwide, non-exclusive, royalty-free, irrevocable license to reproduce, prepare derivative works of, publicly display, publicly perform, and distribute the work and such derivative works, and to sublicense any or all of the foregoing rights to third parties," effectively giving them unli…
Would that let them GPL or even MIT the code? It would seem so.
Re: Public Money, Public Code
#114Re: Public Money, Public Code
#115I hope this apply to patents as well. There are too many drug research funded by the public but the IP ended up owned by private companies.
Re: Public Money, Public Code
#116Earlier quoted context omitted.
I was tangentially related to the covid app stuff so I can offer some insight there: most of those apps weren't built by the state. Google provided an open-source "base app" that could be customized by the states, but most states hired third-party contractors to build an app for them. I've worked in public sector and this is typical. the states can't open source it because they don't own it, they just pay a third-par…
> but most states hired third-party contractors to build an app for them. So the states paid the bills so can license the result any way they want. How can they pay for something and not own it? Sounds to me like there are deep corruption problems
Have you ever purchases software? Any media, recorded performance, or book?
I don't mean to be rude here, but this question shows a complete lack of awareness of the problem space.
There are a number of contributing factors to why most government software is not open source, but here are some of my direct observations as a consultant to government departments, an employee of government departments, a purchaser of products and services at multiple corporations, and a manager of contract software development as an employee of a corporation, and the owner of small business.
1. Stakeholders building software, using either directly employed, or contracted resources, have a desire to develop the software for the lowest cost possible. Generally this means preferring buying over building for many cases, and building on commercial (paid, free, or open source) stacks that promise easier development and efficiency. This often results the project being encumbered by licenses that complicate the potential release of software as open source.
2. Many government initiated software development projects are done directly in pursuit of supporting legislation that is tightly bound to the jurisdiction of the legislation; even if the legislation is meant to ratify state/provincial, federal, international or other standards, laws, and regulations, there will be regional variations that require at minimum configuration, and most likely real code changes to meet requirements. This often results in software that is tightly coupled to a particular jurisdiction in terms of both legislation and regulations, but also in terms of the ecosystem the software is developed in. The encumbrances created by these couplings often have dependencies on closed and proprietary systems which is a great deal of friction for releasing open source projects.
3. Despite the passage of many international rules related to economic development agreements like the former NAFTA and the newer USMCA which provide provisions to allow fair competition for government contracts within the regions affected (and I believe EU and other trade blocs have similar legislation), the opportunity to award software development contracts to local firms (at any level of locality across municipal, state, and federal jurisdictions) is a strong temptation for politicians to curry favor with voters and business communities. This is often pitched as economic benefits by creating jobs locally, while bolstering local businesses and making them more competitive; if these projects are subsequently released as open source projects, the perception from decision makers is that the value of the investment in the local community is lost. This is where a significant opportunity for what you bill as corruption is identified - I haven't seen a procurement process in government that can't be subverted by suitably motivated buyers and sellers.
4. Releasing open source software can be a public relations nightmare - bug reports, public review and criticism of design or implementation choices generally land on the desks of whatever passes for a service desk for that jurisdiction, who are usually ill equipped to deal with these technical issues, and also are generally understaffed for their core responsibilities. Eventually those reports and criticisms make their way up through different paths and land on the desk of high level bureaucrats and elected officials, who then have to deal with these issues as public relations items. Have to deal with HeartBleed2022? If it's internally developed and open source, the buck stops with the politicians and how they let it happen, time for a public inquiry! If it's an off the shelf product, "We are disabling the service until a patch becomes available." [1, specifically log4j] , and people can grumble about purchasing choices, but it's much harder to criticize the actual implementation.
Alot of folks in government (including me when I was there) wanted to release our stuff as OSS, but there is only so far you can go with opensourcing modules that depend on SAP code, IBM code, or systems that are supplied by the federal government.
[1] https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/e-services/...
Re: Public Money, Public Code
#117Earlier quoted context omitted.
> However security by obscurity is a layer of defense... It's not: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Security_through_obscurity#Cri... . See also: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kerckhoffs's_principle .
> Security by obscurity alone is discouraged and not recommended by standards bodies A layer, not the only layer. > System security should not depend on the secrecy of the implementation or its components. It is not depending on it. It is just an additional layer to delay or reduce impact.
> If I was a state employee and I wrote the app, and I had to release the source code, then I'm making it very easy for a bad actor to find a vulnerability and exploit it to leak the data of citizens.
Which doesn't seem to suggest any mitigation other than the lack of published source code.
Re: Public Money, Public Code
#118https://github.com/department-of-veterans-affairs https://github.com/nationalsecurityagency https://github.com/GSA https://github.com/CMSgov https://github.com/CDCgov
Re: Public Money, Public Code
#119I know of several situations where entrepreneurs in europe put substantial money on the table in projects which were funded by grants from the government. It would be really bad for entrepreneurship in europe if it would be required to make software open source the moment some grant money is involved. Let's imagine you spend 500K of your savings, and the government gives you a 50K grant. Now you need to open source y…
I can’t tell based on the information on the site, but there may be some nuance to the threshold where this becomes a requirement. I imagine it will not be an all or nothing situation, but I am not sure ultimately. Also, if there was a bunch of public code available because of grant funding, that means - in theory - many people might not have to invest their own money (or quite as much) because there is more out ther…
and if I as an entrepreneur put money into something, I expect to own it. even if a grant was involved. after all, I already paid taxes to make those grants possible in the first place.
Re: Public Money, Public Code
#120The state I lived in developed one of those covid tracking apps. I asked for the source code and was told it wasn't available and would never be. I talked to people working on other software developed for the state and they all think that software shouldn't be public. It seems crazy to me that taxpayers pay for this software but it doesn't belong to them. Knowing what I do know I gotta wonder if it's just about those…
I was tangentially related to the covid app stuff so I can offer some insight there: most of those apps weren't built by the state. Google provided an open-source "base app" that could be customized by the states, but most states hired third-party contractors to build an app for them. I've worked in public sector and this is typical. the states can't open source it because they don't own it, they just pay a third-par…