McAfee Worried Over "Ambiguous" Open Source Licenses

willdavid writes to tell us InformationWeek is reporting that McAfee, in their annual report, has warned investors that "ambiguous" open source licenses "may result in unanticipated obligations regarding [McAfee] products." "McAfee said it's particularly troubling that the legality of terms included in the GNU/General Public License -- the most widely used open source license -- have yet to be tested in court. 'Use of GPL software could subject certain portions of our proprietary software to the GPL requirements, which may have adverse effects on our sales of the products incorporating any such software,' McAfee said in the report filed last month with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Among other things, the GPL requires that manufacturers who in their products use software governed by the license distribute the software's source code to end users or customers. Some manufacturers have voiced concerns that the requirement could leave important security or copyright protection features in their products open to tampering."

Comments

What's the problem?

[zebslash]

Don't want to be bound to the terms of the GPL? Don't use GPL code!
Just another piece of FUD.

Fine.

[palegray.net]

If you're worried about "uncertainties" with respect to any software license, don't include code in your application that might cause those licensing terms to apply to it. End of story.

just lazy companies.

[bark]

there is no free lunch. these manufacturers are seeing the "gold mine" open source software as a way to do less work. Well, you've got to comply with the terms of the license if you distribute it. no 2 ways about it.

Re:I don't get it

[Broken Toys]

"McAfee's warning may have been prompted by the fact the Software Freedom Law Center, an open source advocacy group, recently filed a series of lawsuits against alleged GPL violators."

The article isn't very clear on this point but it sounds like McAfee is almost admitting they violated the GPL and are about to end up in court.

Re:I don't get it

[unlametheweak]

The article talks more about lawsuits regarding GPL license violations than it does about security issues.

Much security software is already open-source: encryption, firewall, virus scan, etc. The fact is that there is no inherent security problem with GPL software. McAfee just appears to have a problem with the licensing.

Yes it seems like they would like to have their open source cake and eat it too.

Re:I don't get it

[unlametheweak]

Yes. And to correct the article, they aren't really worried about having to release code may "leave ... products open to tampering", but rather, people might find blatantly obvious bugs or omissions with how they "protect" your computer. And then profit from it, either by writing rootkits or whatever that bypass their "protection" or by sueing them when they are infected by these rootkits. I would suspect that it would be easier to run automated programs for finding buffer over-runs, etc, rather than phishing through thousands of lines of code looking for a non-obvious vulnerability (anybody who has ever coded knows that ALL coding mistakes are non-obvious... as soon as they press the compile button :P).

By their logic it would be trivial to hack into a Linux computer because it is open-source, and next to impossible to hack into a Microsoft computer.

Re:Lone programmer, against company policy

[Anonymous Coward]

You are seriously mistaken. You are assuming that it is company policy to inappropriately incorporate GPL'd code. It may be against policy but a programmer may get lazy and do it on his own. Then when that's identified, they have to remove the code, if necessary pulling the product. Or comply with whatever license the copyright holder is prepared to grant them. This is EXACTLY the same position as if the lazy programmer had infringed on a previous employer's code, or on leaked Microsoft code or... any other copyright infringement at all.

Their best bet is to tighten up on their recruitment and code review processes. That would certainly beat complaining that it MAY turn out that some of their employees may be breaking various laws and that if they are then the victims may be gosh darned unreasonable about it.

Re:Obviously they are worried

[DrSkwid]

> When all software out there is Open Source, leaks will be found and closed.

When all software is open source, there will be so much of it that the scope for virus infection is wider and products that monitor system calls and does intrusion detection will have more market.

McAffee's real problem is that Windows gets more and more locked down and fine grained capability permissions are being applied. The days of the blanket anti-virus product are numbered in the business world balanced against the rise of the dedicated software administrator.

Re:I don't get it

[Simon Brooke]

Yes. And to correct the article, they aren't really worried about having to release code may "leave ... products open to tampering", but rather, people might find blatantly obvious bugs or omissions with how they "protect" your computer. And then profit from it, either by writing rootkits or whatever that bypass their "protection" or by sueing them when they are infected by these rootkits.

They have a very simple solution, then, don't they? Do their own graft, write their own damn software, and stop freeloading off the community.

Re:I don't get it

[Peaker]

anybody who has ever coded knows that ALL coding mistakes are non-obvious... as soon as they press the compile button :P

Quite a few bugs are obvious to the experienced programmer.

Many are not obviously bugs, but are obviously "bad practice" which will often lead to bugs.

Once a proficient programmer re-factors "ugly" (full of "bad practice") code, most flaws also become obvious.

Re:I don't get it

[HangingChad]

Do their own graft, write their own damn software, and stop freeloading off the community.

What kind of leftie, tree-hugging nonsense is that? Expecting corporations to accept responsibility when there is shareholder value to consider, quarterly numbers to make and fat bonuses to earn.

Accountability...I can't believe such a radical concept will ever fly. The American corporate way is to have our cake, eat it too and expense the bill as entertainment.