The BIND Forum and the maintenance of critical software
[Posted November 25, 2002 by corbet]
Spurred on, perhaps, by the latest set of BIND vulnerabilities (and the
problematic handling of those vulnerabilities), the Internet Software
Consortium has
announced
the startup of the "BIND Forum," with AFNIC, APNIC, ARIN, Compaq,
Ericsson, HP, IBM, RIPE, Sun, and VeriSign as initial members. Many in the
free software community are suspicious of the Forum and its motives. The
Forum is worth a look, however, as one way of managing development and
support for a piece of critical network software.
BIND, of course, is the package that implements most of the domain name
system. The BIND Forum is a relatively old (and controversial) idea - it
was first announced back in
January, 2001. The basic idea was that members, in exchange for helping to
fund BIND development, would gain access to the BIND developers and,
crucially, early access to security updates. The idea of restricting
security information (about free software) to those who have paid a fee did
not prove popular in the community. As a result of criticism, and,
presumably, lack of interest, the Forum idea stalled for almost two years.
Now, however, it is back.
Corporate memberships in the Forum cost $5000 per year - unless you have
over $2 billion in revenue, in which case you pay $50,000.
Universities and nonprofit organizations are asked to pay $1000, and
individual memberships have a "target minimum" fee of $100. For these
fees, members get:
- Direct notification of patches from ISC.
- Read-only access to the ISC cvs server.
- The ability to attend the "BIND Developers Workshop."
All of this requires signing a relatively lengthy contract (available from
the ISC site), along with an
"intellectual property policy statement" which, essentially, seems to be a
restatement of the BIND license.
Those benefits may well be useful to a small number of companies that are
deeply concerned with BIND development. What the Forum really has to
offer, though, is early access to security alerts. That access is
not available to standard Forum members, though; getting the
security information requires signing a separate agreement and tacking
an addition 20% onto the membership fees. The agreement states that ISC
will notify members of security problems "up to ten days" before telling
the world by way of CERT. Members are required to keep this information
confidential, however, and must guard it "using authentication and
encryption tools which have been approved in writing by ISC."
So, if you pay enough, you'll get early warning of security problems, but
only if ISC feels like sending it out. Of course, the last vulnerability
was not disclosed through ISC, so Forum membership would not have been all
that useful that time around.
The Forum appears, to many, to be a way of extracting money from BIND users
by restricting access to vital security information. Some see it as a
violation of the ethics of full disclosure and free access to the
software. This may all be true, but it is worth keeping some things in
mind:
- Restricted access to security information during the early stages
of a vulnerability is increasingly the norm. Linux distributors (and
others), for example, maintain a controlled mailing list for the
discussion of security problems. Done properly, restricted access can
help ensure that patches are available to most users before
information on the problem is widely available.
- Companies that rely heavily on software like BIND have an interest
in seeing that it is maintained well. They should be willing
to pay for this work.
- BIND remains free software; anybody who has a better way of
maintaining it and handling security problems can fork the project and
run it as they see fit.
If the BIND Forum idea is implemented well, it could support the future
development of the software and help make it more secure for all users.
If implemented poorly, it could become an insiders club that ends up
restricting the general availability of security information indefinitely.
The "up to ten days" provision in the security notification agreement is
encouraging in this respect: there is an implicit promise that security
information will be restricted to the Forum for no longer than that
period.
Whether the BIND Forum will be a success and be helpful to all BIND users
remains to be seen. It could well go either way. But, as people and
companies continue to look around for viable ways of funding free software
development, it would not be
surprising to see the creation of more organizations like the BIND Forum in
the future.
(
Log in to post comments)