Fedora Board Recap 2010-11-08

[Ricky Zhou]

On 2010-11-11 03:49:29 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> Review on FE-LEGAL typically involves Red Hat Legal making a decision on
> whether this is acceptable or not.  Did they?  If they are fine with
> it,  Fedora Board's concerns seem very fuzzy to me.  Yeah, sure it can
> be used to attack other systems but the reason it has been put up for
> review and will be included in Fedora Security Lab if approved is
> because if you are on the other side of the fence, one needs to make
> sure we don't get attacked by such tools and it would be prudent to run
> this tool and secure ourselves.  Heck, we can run it against Fedora
> Infrastructure systems to see if more hardening is needed anywhere.  
A lot of you have probably seen this article, but I just wanted to
mention it, as some people brought up programs Tor and Freenet (which
doesn't seem to be in Fedora) that can be used to illegally bypass
censorship in certain countries.

http://lwn.net/Articles/414438/

A few people in the comments also agree that the legal concerns are a
little fuzzy (and that programs like sqlninja have legitimate uses).  Is
there any chance that this issue could be revisited if it happens to
turns out that there isn't much actual legal risk involved to Fedora/Red
Hat?

Thanks,
Ricky
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/advisory-board/attachments/20101111/b939b422/attachment-0001.bin