On Sun, 2008-05-18 at 12:42 +0200, Florian Weimer wrote: > * Ben Finney: > > > Florian Weimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > >> * MJ Ray: > >> > >> > didn't mention how free (as in freedom) software allows any random > >> > end-user to check or have it checked. > >> > >> How is this different from proprietary software? > > > > Either this is obvious, or I'm not understanding the question. > > > > Software that doesn't give the user freedom to inspect the source code > > and pass it on to others, doesn't allow the user to check the software > > themselves or have someone else check it and pass it along to them. > > This is distinct from free software, which allows all of this. > > These days, there's hardly any widely used piece of proprietary software > for which you can't get the source code. You can't make modifications, > and there might be restrictions with whom you can share your results, > but security reviews based on source code are definitely possible.
But you might of course get sued by an IPR holder if you then worked on a similar project and they claimed you had stolen their idea that you saw in their code. Shared source has specific risks to the user that FOSS doesn't have. > It's also not clear if source code availability is that helpful for > uncovering security bugs. Certainly there are some deterrents in exercising the right to go and take a look depending on how the proprietary software is licensed. Whether this makes a practical difference? Who knows? Ian -- New QCA Accredited IT Qualifications www.theINGOTs.org You have received this email from the following company: The Learning Machine Limited, Reg Office, 36 Ashby Road, Tamworth, Staffordshire, B79 8AQ. Reg No: 05560797, Registered in England and Wales. _______________________________________________ Fsfe-uk mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/fsfe-uk
