Libre Tools from the National Cybersecurity Competence Center of Luxembourg
opensource.nc3.lu
opensource.nc3.lu
It's the most recent, really in development. It's about scanning IP ranges, looking for vulnerabilities (in MS Exchange Servers and various things) and sending notifications. Some parts are already used for operational stuff (NMAP Script Engines for example).
An other really interesting project, under AGPL as well: https://opensource.nc3.lu/projects/monarc/
"MONARC is an iterative and qualitative method of risk analysis in four stages, broadly inspired by ISO/IEC 27005." ;-)
And maybe this project: https://github.com/NC3-LU/MOSP As you can see it's a collaborative platform to share security related JSON objects. The nice thing is the object editing user interface automatically generated thanks to the JSON schemas. The project provides an API and is connected to every MONARC instances.
> The purpose of the GNU Affero GPL is to prevent a problem that affects developers of free programs that are often used on servers.
AGPL is GPL3 but better IMO.
https://nitter.net/marcan42/status/1512269055763566592
I stopped reading here. But this will definitely make my day. I won't even start to list examples of companies (private sector, public sector, research, etc.) that are not in this "only entities".
FUD is why. GPL and AGPL basically both state that you have to provide the source code to people who come in possesion of a copy, with AGPL stating that you also have to provide source code to users interacting with a copy of this software remotely.
Some people got it in their head that this means you have to provide the source code to everything and the kitchen sink running remotely near the computer running a single line of AGPL licensed code.
> The other comment mentions the diff between it and v3 is providing source
The diff is having to provide source for interacting with a remote copy vs having to provide source for local copies only.
If I were to invest my time to build something for the community, it has to be GPL/agpl or sspl. That's my personal preference so yeah
There are many situations in which complying with clauses like this is almost impossible
> 13. Remote Network Interaction; Use with the GNU General Public License.
> Notwithstanding any other provision of this License, if you modify the Program, your modified version must prominently offer all users interacting with it remotely through a computer network (if your version supports such interaction) an opportunity to receive the Corresponding Source of your version by providing access to the Corresponding Source from a network server at no charge, through some standard or customary means of facilitating copying of software. This Corresponding Source shall include the Corresponding Source for any work covered by version 3 of the GNU General Public License that is incorporated pursuant to the following paragraph.
Unless we're going to interpret "prominent" as "whatever is convenient", this clause restricts AGPL to software which is capable of prominently displaying messages to the user.
It's a poorly written license, it leaves you with no clear answers in this situation.
How is that almost impossible?
No but seriously I admit it's not a good choice. We will change it to something else. I personally never used Telegram, I do not even know how their Website looks like.