Home page logo

fulldisclosure logo Full Disclosure mailing list archives

Re: New open source Security Framework
From: xD 0x41 <secn3t () gmail com>
Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2011 07:37:00 +1100

Well, I guess then people nowdays should be keeping more watch on ANYTHING
they release into public... It is just going to get more complex i assume,
with adding more lisences, as creative commons has kindly done.. however i
do like theyre lisence, as it actually covers a .txt file, or even a .c
file... wich is mainly why i have used it once in past for some code, so I
could then keep an eye on it, but never have looked atall, at GPL.
Anyhow, thx Valdi for shedding more light on things.

On 7 October 2011 07:03, <Valdis.Kletnieks () vt edu> wrote:

On Fri, 07 Oct 2011 06:36:51 +1100, xD 0x41 said:

I am still abit worried though, of the actual NON free prouct, and then,
what if you add to that, and he adds it to his paid-fopr app, or worse,
doesnt even put it into the exploit-pack but, rather puts it into ONLY
paid product.

One of the good things about the GPL (as opposed to the BSD license), is
you *can't* take GPL code private - if he's adding it to the proprietary
and shipping the result under a non-GPL license, he's in violation of the
and could end up in court.  A lot of embedded hardware people have gotten
into trouble that way.  The *vast* majority have cleaned up their act and
with the GPL requirements by either removing the GPL code or releasing
as required by the GPL.  A few have been silly enough to let it get to
and have universally been handed their butts by the judge.


Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/

  By Date           By Thread  

Current thread:
[ Nmap | Sec Tools | Mailing Lists | Site News | About/Contact | Advertising | Privacy ]