Why can’t proprietary software be private or secure? You cannot verify it for yourself, but nothing about the licensing model precludes it. In highly regulated industries (such as health care or banking), I would expect a very large investment by software vendors into security.
Since it’s very difficult to verify what the program does, the user has to trust that it’s secure. But there is no place for trust in security. If you have to trust something, it is not secure. Encryption protocols that we all use are not proprietary. It would be ridiculous if we had to just believe that they are secure. Fortunately we don’t have to, because any expert in the world can verify it.
In highly regulated industries (such as health care or banking), I would expect a very large investment by software vendors into security.
Sure, the developer probably doesn’t want all the user data to leak, but they might want to spy on their users. So what security does a user have? It takes just one proprietary program to ruin your security.
Free Software gives you a right to modify how a program works and share that modified version with others. In proprietary software that would usually be illegal. So if someone does find a vulnerability and fixes it, they can’t share a patched version with others. Same problem if a program contains spyware or other malicious functionality. Users wouldn’t be able to remove it easily. In proprietary software users are at the mercy of the developers who have complete power over them and their systems.
Why can’t proprietary software be private or secure? You cannot verify it for yourself, but nothing about the licensing model precludes it. In highly regulated industries (such as health care or banking), I would expect a very large investment by software vendors into security.
But you can’t legally modify it and distribute your modified version. You can’t fix a vulnerability and share the patched version with others. Only the developer can, so you are at their mercy. If they add spyware into the program, users can’t do anything about it.
I think it’s a gray area in that if you merely instruct people on it or distribute it as a patcher that contains none of the original code or assets, few would take issue with it, and if they do, their legal position would be much shakier compared to fighting piracy.
Free software is not automatically private or secure, but it can be. Proprietary software can’t.
Why can’t proprietary software be private or secure? You cannot verify it for yourself, but nothing about the licensing model precludes it. In highly regulated industries (such as health care or banking), I would expect a very large investment by software vendors into security.
Since it’s very difficult to verify what the program does, the user has to trust that it’s secure. But there is no place for trust in security. If you have to trust something, it is not secure. Encryption protocols that we all use are not proprietary. It would be ridiculous if we had to just believe that they are secure. Fortunately we don’t have to, because any expert in the world can verify it.
Sure, the developer probably doesn’t want all the user data to leak, but they might want to spy on their users. So what security does a user have? It takes just one proprietary program to ruin your security.
Free Software gives you a right to modify how a program works and share that modified version with others. In proprietary software that would usually be illegal. So if someone does find a vulnerability and fixes it, they can’t share a patched version with others. Same problem if a program contains spyware or other malicious functionality. Users wouldn’t be able to remove it easily. In proprietary software users are at the mercy of the developers who have complete power over them and their systems.
Why can’t proprietary software be private or secure? You cannot verify it for yourself, but nothing about the licensing model precludes it. In highly regulated industries (such as health care or banking), I would expect a very large investment by software vendors into security.
You can disassemble any kind of closed source software and fully analyze it.
But you can’t legally modify it and distribute your modified version. You can’t fix a vulnerability and share the patched version with others. Only the developer can, so you are at their mercy. If they add spyware into the program, users can’t do anything about it.
I think it’s a gray area in that if you merely instruct people on it or distribute it as a patcher that contains none of the original code or assets, few would take issue with it, and if they do, their legal position would be much shakier compared to fighting piracy.
That’s true. Still it’s more difficult for everyone.