From owner-freebsd-security Mon Sep 27 13:48:12 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-security@freebsd.org Received: from gndrsh.dnsmgr.net (GndRsh.dnsmgr.net [198.145.92.4]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D225114BDD for ; Mon, 27 Sep 1999 13:48:00 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from freebsd@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net) Received: (from freebsd@localhost) by gndrsh.dnsmgr.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id NAA13161; Mon, 27 Sep 1999 13:38:05 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from freebsd) From: "Rodney W. Grimes" Message-Id: <199909272038.NAA13161@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net> Subject: Re: dump(8) Insecurity/Misconfiguration In-Reply-To: <199909271932.NAA11712@mt.sri.com> from Nate Williams at "Sep 27, 1999 01:32:32 pm" To: nate@mt.sri.com (Nate Williams) Date: Mon, 27 Sep 1999 13:38:05 -0700 (PDT) Cc: cjclark@home.com, Cy.Schubert@uumail.gov.bc.ca (Cy Schubert - ITSD Open Systems Group), dillon@apollo.backplane.com (Matthew Dillon), freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL54 (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org > > > [ Rod, you *really* need to get out more ] > > > > What, I spent 5 hours yesterday cleaning the side yard at the shop, is > > that ``out'' enough for you :-) :-) :-) > > No, cause it's work related. Go jump out of a plane or something. :) I wish I could, medical reasons have had me grounded for over 2 years now :-( :-(. > [ > Rod asserts that using SSH for backups is a revenue-generating task, and > as such violates the 'free' use of the SSH license. > ] > > > I'll bet you dollars to a dog turd that the SSH licensor considers this > > a licensable situation. > > I've got the dog turd, so the bet is on. Okay. Who do I call or email?? > >>> You may also find that the license fee is quite low for what you > >>> want to do. > >> > >> NOT! > > > Then it is even more likely to be outside of the scope of the shareware > > license. > > It's not a shareware license, or even close to one. It basically says > that if you make money from using this product (not, if you make money > *AND* use this product), then you must pay for it. > > The amount of money you pay is not dependant on how much money you make, > it's a fixed fee based on the the number of 'machines' it's installed > on. > > (Last I bought the commercial product, it was $2K/CPU, but that was a > couple of years ago.) Not unreasonable, but probably a set back to those who are use to the freeness of open source. > > We pay this, but it's because we needed some additional features that > the commercial version had. I could have hacked the code myself, but > that assumed I could do it less than 40 hours, and I doubt I could have > it done/tested/documented in that amount of time, hence we just bought > it for the one box that needed the feature. > > The other boxes all run the 'free' version. > > However, $2K/seat is alot of money for an ISP to charge for something as > trivial as backups, especially when minimum cost is $4K (one for the > tape server, and one for the remote client). Hummmm.... twice what a reasonable capacity tape drive is a bit much!! But it is much less than some of the backup solutions we have done for clients, with DLT robots and such. > It's simply not worth it, IMO. It could be worth it, if Licenese violations where at concerned the normal allowable damages would far exceed the $4K. The real simple solution for this person is to simply go use amanda, that is how we eliminated this whole issue! -- Rod Grimes - KD7CAX - (RWG25) rgrimes@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-security" in the body of the message