News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:The Air Force is having to reverse engineer parts of its ... by oconnor663 on Wednesday March 03, 2021 @09:22PM (#26337826)
There are lots of different types of projects. Sometimes you're asking people to invent things for you, and you're the only conceivable customer for that thing, and (like here) it would be weird and perverse not to require all the data/specs/whatever for that thing. Other times you're buying something that's already been invented, with many existing customers, and the data/specs/whatever for that product line are worth much more than the units you actually want to buy, and it wouldn't make any sense to have to buy out that entire product line just to use the product. It might be hard to make simple rules that distinguish between these cases, and all the gray areas in between.
Re:The Air Force is having to reverse engineer parts of its ... by ric2b on Thursday March 04, 2021 @11:30AM (#26344472)
It would at least make sense for it to be mandatory for any vehicles or weapons used by the DoD, no?
Re:The Air Force is having to reverse engineer parts of its ... by 1MachineElf on Thursday March 04, 2021 @11:48AM (#26344728)
I wonder if doing so would create a barrier to entry for the annual billions of $ of defense equipment the US sells to Saudi Arabia. For example, what if Saudi Arabia considers it a risk if another government has the technical plans? If that were the case, I expect defense contractors would be adverse to divulging those details.
Re:The Air Force is having to reverse engineer parts of its ... by suifbwish on Friday March 05, 2021 @03:03PM (#26361358)
And if the contractor were located in Australia or China the government could legally mandate the defense contractors give them access to the code