Activists are targeting Russians with open-source "protestware" (Technology Review)
No tech firm has gone that far, but around two dozen open-source software projects have been spotted adding code protesting the war, according to observers tracking the protestware movement. Open-source software is software that anyone can modify and inspect, making it more transparent—and, in this case at least, more open to sabotage.
Posted Mar 22, 2022 15:04 UTC (Tue)
by LtWorf (subscriber, #124958)
[Link] (3 responses)
Uh? I don't think open source means that you don't need credentials to do edits.
Posted Mar 22, 2022 21:38 UTC (Tue)
by Duncan (guest, #6647)
[Link] (1 responses)
Sure it does. The four essential software freedoms include the rights to study and modify the software (freedom 1), and to share/distribute both the original software and your changes under the same license terms that gave you those rights in the first place (freedoms 2/original and 3/as-you-modified). There's also the freedom to run the software as you wish, for any purpose (freedom 0), thus preempting legal-anti-war-ware, etc, from being open source, because that obstructs the freedom 0 of those users. No "credentials" needed.
Of course what is *not* included is the right to distribute your changed version claiming it to be the original, unchanged version, or to replace the original version without appropriate authorization and credentials.
But simply editing free/libre and open source software is fine, and distributing both the original and your edits under the same license is fine, no "credentials" or authorization beyond that already in the free and open source software license needed, as long as you're not claiming it to be the original.
https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.en.html#four-freedoms
Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer. Read the licenses and ensure your rights yourself and/or have a licensed professional you trust do so for you, if you're planning on taking advantage of them.
Posted Mar 23, 2022 8:36 UTC (Wed)
by LtWorf (subscriber, #124958)
[Link]
The sentence in the article is still wrong as it implies anyone can do such sabotage while in truth it is the project owner doing it and not some random passerby.
Posted Mar 23, 2022 10:47 UTC (Wed)
by eduperez (guest, #11232)
[Link]
> When the Russian invasion of Ukraine began, some suggested that in order to impose costs on Moscow, tech firms should stop sending updates to Russian users. No tech firm has gone that far, but around two dozen open-source software projects have been spotted adding code protesting the war, according to observers tracking the protestware movement. Open-source software is software that anyone can modify and inspect, making it more transparent—and, in this case at least, more open to sabotage.
They seem to be not-so-subtly implying that some open-source software was sabotaged by a third party, to add some code protesting the war.
Posted Mar 22, 2022 18:29 UTC (Tue)
by flussence (guest, #85566)
[Link]
There was a "minor" incident a few days ago where the country's public transit system (among other things) was thrown into chaos because online payment processors decided *their* software could simply brick itself with no warning.
Oddly, MTR has no words of criticism for that move. Maybe the giant text an inch above that statement has something to do with it.
Posted Mar 22, 2022 18:46 UTC (Tue)
by mrugiero (guest, #153040)
[Link] (3 responses)
Posted Mar 22, 2022 19:20 UTC (Tue)
by tzafrir (subscriber, #11501)
[Link]
Posted Mar 23, 2022 10:42 UTC (Wed)
by NAR (subscriber, #1313)
[Link]
There's an interpretation of the events at the end of World War I that this indeed happened. According to Wikipedia, one of the reasons of the 1917 February revolution in Russia was the introduction of food rationing. It's up to debate how much of the German, Hungarian revolutions were caused by the miserable living conditions at home and/or by the impending military defeat.
Posted Mar 23, 2022 12:43 UTC (Wed)
by rahulsundaram (subscriber, #21946)
[Link]
Lots of actions (bombing) and counter actions (sanctions etc) do affect civilians of the countries involved. It may not be the direct intention but an inevitable consequence. No such thing as a war that doesn't affect civilians.
Posted Mar 22, 2022 20:14 UTC (Tue)
by dskoll (subscriber, #1630)
[Link]
This kind of activism is problematic for two reasons: (1) it can easily have unintended consequences and harm innocent people, and (2) it provides anti-Free-Software forces with ammunition for spreading FUD about Free Software.
Maybe it felt good, but I think it was a dumb thing to do.
Posted Mar 22, 2022 20:50 UTC (Tue)
by sub2LWN (subscriber, #134200)
[Link] (3 responses)
Posted Mar 22, 2022 23:05 UTC (Tue)
by jafd (subscriber, #129642)
[Link] (2 responses)
It's not effective at all. No one is going to move their ass an inch if their comfort is at stake by doing so.
> Vim reminds us broadly of starving Ugandans
That's a different thing altogether. Do Ugandans have a clear aggressor depriving them of food that needs to be put down?
Posted Mar 23, 2022 1:41 UTC (Wed)
by sub2LWN (subscriber, #134200)
[Link]
I'd argue that the current approach to "protestware" is effective at chilling or reverting the adoption of software, and discouraging contributors. I'd also argue that's what it's most effective at, compared to any offense or defense against any clear or fuzzy "aggressors".
Posted Mar 24, 2022 23:17 UTC (Thu)
by flussence (guest, #85566)
[Link]
It's different due to the fact most of the aggressors died of old age centuries ago; direct retaliation is no longer possible.
Posted Mar 23, 2022 10:01 UTC (Wed)
by adobriyan (subscriber, #30858)
[Link]
Posted Mar 24, 2022 6:04 UTC (Thu)
by developer122 (guest, #152928)
[Link]
And to be honest? It doesn't even accomplish anything. Russian tech will just roll back to n-1.
Activists are targeting Russians with open-source "protestware" (Technology Review)
Activists are targeting Russians with open-source "protestware" (Technology Review)
Activists are targeting Russians with open-source "protestware" (Technology Review)
Activists are targeting Russians with open-source "protestware" (Technology Review)
Activists are targeting Russians with open-source "protestware" (Technology Review)
Activists are targeting Russians with open-source "protestware" (Technology Review)
You won't stop the war by making _civilians'_ lives miserable. On the contrary, you may increase the tensions and feed reactionary movements with new recruits that see the outside world as aggressors.
Not only that, but everything that aims at maiming communication with the outside world and destroying data based only on geolocation is helpful to oppressive governments, as opposing groups are isolated too.
Activists are targeting Russians with open-source "protestware" (Technology Review)
You won't stop the war by making _civilians'_ lives miserable.
Activists are targeting Russians with open-source "protestware" (Technology Review)
Activists are targeting Russians with open-source "protestware" (Technology Review)
Activists are targeting Russians with open-source "protestware" (Technology Review)
Activists are targeting Russians with open-source "protestware" (Technology Review)
Activists are targeting Russians with open-source "protestware" (Technology Review)
Activists are targeting Russians with open-source "protestware" (Technology Review)
Activists are targeting Russians with open-source "protestware" (Technology Review)
> That's a different thing altogether. Do Ugandans have a clear aggressor depriving them of food that needs to be put down?
Activists are targeting Russians with open-source "protestware" (Technology Review)
Activists are targeting Russians with open-source "protestware" (Technology Review)