FOSSA - Now we need feedback by the real experts
Stefan Umit Uygur
ostendali at fsfe.org
Tue Jul 12 11:05:32 UTC 2016
I wasn't aware myself about this initiative at all to be honest. Dealing
with bureaucrats is not an easy think. I read a bit the documents and the
deliverable and I see this as an opportunity if I may.
A part from the report of deliverable, which is an obvious thing that they
have no knowledge about free software or they maybe don't want to know, we
have also, as community, the lack of supporting or providing proof of how
reliable and secure is free software. those who are using free software
already knows that it is safer than any other proprietary software, the
massive usage by everyone (both companies and private entities) gives an
But still, we as free software community are not well organized to this end.
So the opportunity I am referring to is to take this idea and create an
entity that audits free software in general and releases the reports. in
the end, the major tools used by everyone are not that many which makes
things easier for the auditing entity.
the question is I am not really sure if this either to be FSFE or a
separate organisation, I'd rather say FSFE which will bring enormous
advantages to free software world and automatically to FSFE.
Not sure if i explained myself but i'd opt for the creation of such entity
as I feel confident it have a massive success for free software. i feel
also confident as I am part of a free software community where we develop a
linux penetration testing distro. making a free software security community
part of this auditing entity wouldn't be that difficult. But it is
difficult to put together all other security teams (i.e. debian, fedora,
centos, redhat, ubuntu, etc.).
Mine is just an idea that i throw just like that and i think it is about
long term solutuion for free software auditing problem and not only when
someone comes and knock the door. I'd love to hear other people's opinions.
On Mon, Jul 11, 2016 at 10:44 PM, Nico Rikken <nico.rikken at fsfe.org> wrote:
> Just wanted to give a shout out for this important topic. I recognize
> the concerns addressed in the commentaries, and can certainly agree
> with them.
> I find it hard to formulate concrete missteps based on the writups,
> even though the general spirit of the recommendations provided
> certainly smells. The License table was a good laugh.
> I afterwards briefly looked over the WP1-04 and it's like a different
> world. Apparently nobody does code reviews, and Debian has no security
> team. Also there are way to many N/A's.
> Dispite some discussion on the formal details of the best-practice
> definitions, the vibe I get is that Open Source Software should not be
> trusted. You know, important people have been saying that for years,
> and with this document as proof, perhaps FOSS is indeed shit, and we
> should stop using it altogether. ;)
> Can we maybe croudsource some of the checkmarks like tools and
> practices? Perhaps we can show what FOSS is really all about.
> I'll probably take a closer look in the coming days. For now I would
> like to encourage anyone on this list to get outraged on the results so
> Thanks Matthias, Mirko, and all others involved.
> Kind regards,
> Discussion mailing list
> Discussion at fsfeurope.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Discussion