The open source cryptography platform Qabel promises encryption from the outset for services such as cloud, e-mail or Messenger and industrial applications. But although Qabel is open source, there is no so-called “free and open source software”. Because Qabel prohibits intelligence services and military use of its solution. But why? Peter Leppelt, CEO of Qabel:
“It is more or less understood as a statement that we just do not want our software that our work, which we are working, is used for things that harm or restrict somehow. and after the revelations of Edward Snowden it seemed simply necessary that anybody does anything at the site and someone has to start somewhere and we thought we would make it. “
protection against software abuse
this pushed the young project in the purest wasp nest. There was criticism as well as approval from all possible sides. Because the question is fermented for a long time in the developer community. Security researchers and Chaos Computer Club member Thorsten Schröder summarizes the attitude of many developers together like that.
“I think just that some things are more important to evaluate and I want to just be able to decide whether the military my software allowed to be used. “
one of the biggest critics of such a disclaimer is the Free software Foundation. She argues with such a clause, the software is simply no more free software. The must can fulfill four freedoms, declared the president of the European branch of the association Matthias Kirschner.
“This is a moment that the software may be used by each person for any purpose. This is that the software more widely may be. This is that the software must be understood, therefore, the operation of the software. But then the source code is necessary. and that the software can be changed and must be adapted to individual needs. that is, the core of freedom is that may they be non-discriminatory use of any people for any purpose. “
Royalty refusal to morally questionable purposes
But there are also good reasons to exclude anyone from using the self-written program code? Thorsten Schröder says yes:.
“was partially Software demonstrably also used by companies or military, in order to add other people harm An example is Collin Mulliner, who made much safety research in the field Android mobile platform and has since written many frameworks and code. this software was developed by hacking team just used for their own products and those products that manufactures hacking team, which are sold to Government of various countries, some of which just the same with democracy take not as accurate. “
hacking team gained a certain notoriety when it was pierced that not only unjust regimes people were monitored and spied on the company’s software. With unclear consequences for life and health of those affected. The want Thorsten Schröder and other developers so not tolerate and therefore refuse to morally questionable purposes licensing. But whether the so excluded to comply with the license terms? Matthias Kirschner of the Free Software Foundation Europe doubted that.
“People who are willing to kill others who consider themselves after a license? I see very critical. I believe that people, taking into account that other people are killed that are not purely look at the license and say oh I may not be used for military purposes and then not use it. “
military and intelligence clause paves the way for further restrictions
Thorsten Schröder from the chaos computer Club holds it.
“I have still the opportunity to carry a political debate in the public and that is actually so the most important concern here. that said, I can draw attention to the public, that here I know any military or a commercial company that produces the spyware, deliberately against my rules, conditions of use has failed to the use. “
Matthias Kirschner but feared a military and intelligence clause in licenses of free software would open the way for many other restrictions.
“there are quite a lot of value systems that each person has. And he actually wants to prevent other people using the software that you wrote, such things do, I can understand everyone and I all think is very legitimate, then where is the question, which allows you still in licenses and allowing not one. And the core demand of free software, it has always been that there is this freedom that it is used without discrimination. “
No comments:
Post a Comment