Hacker News Reader

Comment by 1337p337 | Hacker News Reader

> I really don't think that this has anything whatsoever to do with closed vs. open source.

[...]

> Would open-source prevent this kind of thing? Probably.

I don't think I could have made the argument better than you have.

The point isn't that all closed source software does this, or even that most does it. The point is that when you cannot control the software, the abuse can happen. Anyone who has power can abuse it, which means that if you cede control over software in your router to Cisco, you have to trust Cisco not to abuse it. If you don't, then you don't have to worry.

View on HN

Even if Cisco was running open source code they could still put ALL of this language into this agreement. The difference would be you could see the actual mechanism in work if they had open source code. The egregious part is the language, not the implementation.

Or you could get the code, rip out the parts you didn't like, recompile and install on your router.

You might be breaching the terms & conditions of their cloud stuff, but you could simply choose not to use it.

Well, even though I'm pretty technically literate and know my way around a compiler, I probably couldn't do this, even with the source. There's so much knowledge that you need to accumulate. I could probably learn how to do it, but that would take me weeks, if not month. So first, somebody would have to do it. Second, he'd have to maintain it. Then, my less-computer-literate friends would need someone who makes them aware of the issue and points them to the firmware, probably even install it. Most won't bother, check the box and accept the TOS, maybe thinking "I'm not planning on doing anything illegal anyways." - that won't be solved with open source.

Open source protects the technical literate people, but it's not the silver bullet that solves this issue. Raising awareness and pushing back is at least as important and that's possible with closed source as well.

While I agree with your point Open-source is not a silver bullet. I don't see anything other than Open-source as a good enabler.

Yes, pushing back is possible with closed source as well.

The real question becomes, which is harder? and for who? To push back at closed source, you'd have to be a big consumer of them or atleast big enough to be able to sue the vendor. If you're an individual, you're in real trouble. Of course, there are people who play both roles.

And I see Open-source as the best enabler for technical individuals. As far as i can see, of course.

I think the main difference is that if these routers came from the factory with FLOSS software that I could recompile and reload onto the device then Cisco would have a much harder time actually enforcing their particular implementation.

Sure, take it all out of context and it sounds like I am making a point for FOSS solving this issue. That is not the case. There are practical hardware and business issues that touch a hardware business that simply create a problem for FOSS.

Again, the problem --Cisco wanting access to your data-- does not have a direct causation link to the fact that their software is closed. No such connection exists.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com