Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Skype For Linux To Be Open-Sourced "In the Nearest Future"

Posted by Soulskill on from the more-or-less dept.

rysiek writes "Seems like there might be a revolution in the works, as far as VoIP software for Linux is concerned. After mailing Skype support about Skype providing Mandriva RPM packages, Olivier Faurax got an answer which suggests that the Linux Skype client will be open-sourced. After asking for verification of whether that was the case, the tech support answer claimed it is going to happen, and that it's supposed to happen 'in the nearest future.' Now, this probably only means the client (the underlying protocol will probably be handled by a binary-only library), but even if that's the case, it seems like there is still reason to celebrate."

16 of 175 comments (clear)

  1. GUI Code Only by jisatsusha · · Score: 5, Insightful

    open gui code, but not communicate library.

    Not quite open source then, but I guess it's better than the situation right now. Still no way of ensuring there are no backdoors in the encryption though.

    1. Re:GUI Code Only by Nerdfest · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If you have the client code, you can pre-encrypt before the communications layer if you need the added security.

    2. Re:GUI Code Only by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You're assuming you can feed anything into their comms layer. I suspect there'll be a heavy duty validation / sanity checking at that point already.

    3. Re:GUI Code Only by quippe · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If you have the client code, you can pre-encrypt before the communications layer if you need the added security.

      *Could* that be possible, you would lose interoperability with windows clients, so why not relying on one of the truly foss voip projects availble?

    4. Re:GUI Code Only by fearlezz · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Because a truly foss voip project requires a server or open ports on at least 1 side.
      Skype requires only 2 clients that speak the same protocol, the skype network handles the rest.

      --
      .sig: No such file or directory
    5. Re:GUI Code Only by SLi · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It wouldn't work at all. Nearly all voip, and I'm sure Skype is no exception, uses lossy compression for the audio. If you stuff encrypted data in, you'll just get garbage out.

    6. Re:GUI Code Only by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      How do you encrypt the audio?

      Assuming you are doing the encryption before the comms layer then..

      a) you could have done this already without the source code.

      b) you would have to do it the old way - analog style encryption in the digital domain. As the data is then put through lossy audio compression afterwards, this would leave very little bandwidth for the speech. The lossy compression may make most kinds of audio encryption impossible anyway.

    7. Re:GUI Code Only by FireFury03 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Because a truly foss voip project requires a server or open ports on at least 1 side.

      Plenty of free public SIP servers on the internet...

      Skype requires only 2 clients that speak the same protocol, the skype network handles the rest.

      I'm unclear on why you think that relying on the existence of a single proprietary network is better than relying on a SIP server (which may or may not be operated by yourself and you can switch to a different independent server if you want).

      --
      http://blog.nexusuk.org
  2. Seems largely pointless. by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 4, Insightful

    With something like Skype, pretty much all the stuff of interest is in the protocol(and the weird stuff that it gets up to, burrowing through firewalls and being designed to be heavily resistant to inspection and so forth). The UI isn't ghastly; but it isn't very interesting.

    Obviously, this is exactly why Skype would be OSSing the GUI and not the protocol binary blob; but it is also why the news isn't of much interest. As long as basically all the program's important functions depend on a binary blob you can't see what it is doing, you can't port it to other architectures, you are really no better off than if the whole thing were binary.

    1. Re:Seems largely pointless. by Youngbull · · Score: 2, Insightful

      you could potentially integrate Skype into Empathy or Pidgin if the license is right so I think it's a good thing!

  3. Re:WTF is "the nearest future"? by clone53421 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Yes, but it'll take infinitely long to get there...

    --
    Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
  4. protocol will probably be ... binary-only by TheGreatOrangePeel · · Score: 5, Insightful

    So, assuming the OP is right, they're basically open-sourcing a telephone where the only thing you can change is where the numbers are placed and what the handset looks like. Maybe I'm missing the point, but how does this benefit anyone?

  5. Nope by ledow · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I call bullshit. I think it's just a tech support guy misunderstanding (and it seems a bi-lingual conversation so the chances of that are even higher).

    Open-sourcing Skype is very different to allowing Mandriva to add a non-trademarked icon to the Skype software (a bit like bundling Firefox - fine so long as you respect the trademark on the name and/or the logo and their requirements), or put a Mandriva icon onto the package etc. The two are discussed interchangeably and I don't see how they are related.

    I think it's more likely a massive misunderstanding on the basis of zero evidence / poor translation. At best, I reckon that Skype for Linux will allow itself to be packaged more easily.

  6. Abandonware in 3....2....1.... by mpapet · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This is the same old story. The business doesn't want to support a Linux client so they open the code they have and abandon it.

    I didn't bother reading TFA so maybe someone else can inform us how would one go about acquiring the binary blob in the future? What distros will the blob track? What about an ARM build? Ebay wants to limit their dev hours but abandoning the gui doesn't help them much.

    Which is why I think they'll just abandon the OS altogether sooner rather than later and put a happy face on it with this stunt.

    --
    http://www.maxineudall.com/2010/02/should-economists-be-sued-for-malpractice.html
  7. Re:Cautiously Optimistic? by BitZtream · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I had to deal with this with MS Windows - it's one of the many reasons I use Linux.

    Perhaps you jumped to Linux without considering that it wasn't the end all be all solutions that you were told it was?

    When switching from Windows to Linux you give certain things up, when switching from Windows to MacOS you give certain things up, and indeed when switching from Linux to * you give certain things up. If you didn't, they would all be equal/the exact same and you'd have no reason to switch at all.

    --
    Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
  8. It is not opensource, until... by mi · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Now, this probably only means the client (the underlying protocol will probably be handled by a binary-only library), but even if that's the case, it seems like there is still reason to celebrate

    The source is not open, until I can build and use it on FreeBSD/amd64 or some other "exotic" platform like that...

    Interestingly, the oft-criticized Java has always been more "open-sourced" (even before going GPL), than what the excited write-up is preparing to "celebrate"... Must all be about managing expectations...

    --
    In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.