source code of various related projects: https://github.com/NC3-LU/

Licensed under GNU AGPL, nice.

Interesting to know why exactly this license because GNU GPL3 is more common.

> The GNU Affero General Public License is a modified version of the ordinary GNU GPL version 3. It has one added requirement: if you run a modified program on a server and let other users communicate with it there, your server must also allow them to download the source code corresponding to the modified version running there.

> 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.

indeed, tpxl is right. Affero GPL fits well for Web software (services provided by a server).

It's not really nice; the AGPL is considered by many (myself included) to be a nonfree license created by anticapitalist zealots.

https://nitter.net/marcan42/status/1512269055763566592

https://nitter.net/marcan42/status/1512267950551867395

https://nitter.net/marcan42/status/1512267952573526026

" ...the only entities capable of safely using the AGPL are companies using it to dump source ... "

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".

Can you explain why it's not safe to use for most orgs? The other comment mentions the diff between it and v3 is providing source, but isn't providing the revised source pretty easy?

> Can you explain why it's not safe to use for most orgs?

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.

That is for SSPL license.

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

The "FUD" exists because AGPL is poorly written.

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.

What kind of situations? So far none of the comments criticizing AGPL provide an example.

For example an analytics tool like Piwik couldn't really work with AGPL, as it inherently can't prominently offer anything to users.

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.

Thanks for the example, but I'm still confused. Can't you just add a button to the dashboard for "download source"

Well, that dashboard would be a different piece of software.

It's a poorly written license, it leaves you with no clear answers in this situation.

The part you quoted says you have to provide the source for the remote software on the same server as the remote software, for no charge.

How is that almost impossible?

There are many pieces of software that users interact with, but which are unable to prominently display anything at all. The AGPL license essentially forbids such uses of software.

Which projects do you think would be most interesting to HN users?

I would say this one: https://opensource.nc3.lu/projects/saems/ https://github.com/scandale-project

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.

scandale-project is also meant to monitor constituencies' actions after being notified about security issues. The idea is to timestamp scan results with a Time Stamp Authority to have a clear and indisputable incident timeline following a notification. The aim is to nudge constituencies to take action and also give them leverage on non-cooperating suppliers. No infrastructure change or patch after repeated notifications is not a good trajectory to be on--hence the name, scandale :)

Why are they using Telegram's logo as their icon for "Open"?

It's (Font Awesome) fa-paper-plane, and not fa-telegram.

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.