-
Guus
Are there public records of OWS pursuing legal action against people using libsignal while not adhering to GPL?
-
Ge0rG
Guus: like https://medium.com/@wireapp/axolotl-and-proteus-788519b186a7
-
jonas’
(technically, not using libsignal while not adhering to GPL though)
-
jonas’
(but re-implementing libsignal while not adheering to GPL)
-
Guus
moar! moar!
-
jonas’
Guus, context?
-
Guus
I don't want to say stuff about OWS enforcing GPL without proof to back it up.
-
jonas’
Guus, then I think that @wireapp thing is what you need
-
jonas’
because assuming or suggesting that OWS not enforing GPL on direct uses of libsignal is definitely not a good idea either way✎ -
jonas’
because assuming or suggesting that OWS is not enforing GPL on direct uses of libsignal is definitely not a good idea either way ✏
-
jonas’
that they enforce GPL on derivates or users of libsignal should be the default
-
jonas’
the main issue here is that they also enforce GPL on reimplementations, which is what @wireapp shows
-
jonas’
or am I totally on the wrong track right now?
-
Guus
No, you're not. I'd just like to see more documented cases.
-
jonas’
ok
-
Guus
Thanks!
-
jonas’
(I don’t have any more, tho)
-
pep.
Has anybody actually tried a clean-room implementation?
-
pep.
is that what wire tried to do?
-
ralphm
Of interest: https://moderncrypto.org/mail-archive/messaging/2016/002275.html
-
ralphm
Ge0rG, and for what it is worth, Wire sued OWS, and then there was a settlement. Also, Wire's stuff is still GPL3.
-
jonas’
pep., according to https://medium.com/@wireapp/axolotl-and-proteus-788519b186a7, I think so
-
jonas’
> Like everyone else in the cryptographic community, our team obviously had access to OWS’ GPL’d Java reference implementation online.
-
jonas’
well, ok, maybe not
-
pep.
the article does mention the gpl'd code yeah
-
ralphm
The thread I linked also has Moxie in it somewhere.
-
Guus
Thanks.
-
ralphm
In any case, you'll see that SilentCircle pulled libsalamander in favour of libzina.
-
MattJ
The reply from Moxie in that thread basically says they only care about the trademark
-
jonas’
(which is part of the evil constants)
-
MattJ
Ah
-
MattJ
Fun
-
MattJ
But even GPL doesn't save you from that
-
jonas’
I wonder if that was all planned out from the beginning or just a lucky coincidence.
-
ralphm
The protocol includes constants with 'signal' in them, no? It seems to me that OWS considers any protocol-compatible implementation to be a derivative work.
-
jonas’
ralphm, WhisperSystems even
-
ralphm
ah, nice
-
ralphm
of course XMPP has literal occurances of 'jabber', but at least there's an arrangement with the XSF for this.
-
dwd
ralphm, As I recall, that caused a lot of wrangling in the IETF.
-
dwd
ralphm, Not least the name of the protocol changed.
-
ralphm
dwd: I thought that XMPP was actually proposed by Jabber, Inc.
-
fippo
nah, i think the ietf concluded that having a protocol and a trademark was not going to work. smart. I am looking at you, w3c+webrtc...
-
dwd
I don't know where the name came from. I do know that the IETF got very concerned about a protocol name being trademarked.
-
ralphm
dwd: interestingly, the first draft (https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-xmpp-core-00) had this notice: 1.4 Intellectual Property Notice This document is in full compliance with all provisions of Section 10 of RFC 2026. Parts of this specification use the term "jabber" for identifying namespaces and other protocol syntax. Jabber[tm] is a registered trademark of Jabber, Inc. Jabber, Inc. grants permission to the IETF for use of the Jabber trademark in association with this specification and its successors, if any.
-
dwd
Dear Editors. I'm sorry-not-sorry.
-
ralphm
I tried to look at the old xmppwg mail archives, but it seems that our mailman doesn't show them (anymore).
-
ralphm
MattJ, are they still there?
-
Zash
Our mailman?
-
ralphm
(they used to be here: https://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/xmppwg/)
-
dwd
Guus, You might care about this: https://github.com/xsf/xeps/pull/883
-
Zash
I didn't know this
-
Guus
Thanks Dave 🙂
-
Zash
What has Dave done now?
-
Guus
Be a gentleman.
-
ralphm
Zash, yeah, the xmppwg mailinglist (first WG) was initially hosted by the JSF.
-
dwd
Another two ProtoXEPs. Given my current success rate, I'm not sure why I bother, but still.
-
MattJ
dwd: thanks, that's an item off my to-do :)
-
MattJ
dwd: for what it's worth my plan was to spec two fields, a universal "plain" search and an "advanced" variant that is implementation/deployment-specific but includes a slot for the server to provide some (localized) help text that clients could display to users
-
MattJ
See the popup when you enter the search box in Slack for example
-
Zash
{jabber❌data}desc ?
-
jonas’
with the emoji?
-
Zash
Yes
-
ralphm
Interestingly around that time also a lot of e2e discussion (for RFC 3923)
-
MattJ
Possible
-
fippo
ralphm: IIRC peter once said that he wasn't aware of any implementations of 3923. It was more of a mandated checkbox because of the IMPS-requirements
-
ralphm
It was, but it still had a lot of discussion
-
ralphm
dwd: small typo in PR 883, reviewed.
-
dwd
Ah, crap. Yep.
-
pep.
https://xmpp.org/about/xsf/mission Is it possible to find context around this? I've been skimming through the member list without success. Added in a71bc1df7a100a72b9e840c2a7308668fa385e32 on Sun Jul 26 23:41:33 2015 -0700 by Adam Brault✎ -
pep.
https://xmpp.org/about/xsf/mission Is it possible to get context around this? I've been skimming through the member list without success. Added in a71bc1df7a100a72b9e840c2a7308668fa385e32 on Sun Jul 26 23:41:33 2015 -0700 by Adam Brault ✏
-
pep.
Reading old threads makes me feel like we're a broken record
-
pep.
https://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/members/2014-November/007920.html "Abstaining on XSF ballots"
-
pep.
Ah, there's https://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/members/2014-November/007932.html "Goals for the XSF board". Not sure if that's what lead to the mission statement, but that's probably worth reading anyway
-
ralphm
pep., in 2015 the entire website was redone
-
ralphm
The origin of this page is in 2007.
-
pep.
I see
-
ralphm
I.e. that's how far I've traced it back for now.
-
ralphm
Because I think it is even older, and Jan 2007 was an earlier website overhaul
-
ralphm
I.e. this is when our site moved to xmpp.org
-
ralphm
pep., this page used to be on jabber.org, and virtually hasn't changed since the fall of 2003.
-
ralphm
http://web.archive.org/web/20031011082930/http://www.jabber.org/jsf/
-
ralphm
Apart from the typo in the current version, it still pretty much captures what I think we should be doing.
-
pep.
Thanks for digging it up
-
ralphm
If you want drama, that's the best era, I think.
-
pep.
not looking for drama no
-
jonas’
> ProtoXEP: Inbox
-
jonas’
interesting!
-
dwd
Yeah, I got around to it eventually, and knocked out the full text thing while I was in the right place. Thanks for processing those.
-
jonas’
dwd, you’re also not in council@ at the moment, so I tell you here: my calendar lied to me and I’ll be able to chair tomorrow
-
dwd
Excellent.
-
flow
does anyone do extended stanza adressing over s2s? If not, wouldn't it be a nice way to reduce the bandwith? I assume for example there to be some presence dupes over s2s links
-
Guus
I don't think Openfire does that, flow .
-
Guus
Interesting thought though
-
Zash
IIRC the main issue I ran into was needing to disc#info remote servers and preferably caching the response, and Prosody barelay had PEP-specific bits for that at the time.
-
Zash
Is bandwidth that much of an issue for servers tho?
-
Zash
Over STANAG maybe
-
Zash
And you get more benefits the fewer and larger servers there are. Not sure that's the direction I want to focus on.
-
flow
Zash, I see your point. I just like to theorize about potential optimizations. I also think that this could easily lead to stanza-size issues
-
Zash
flow: I'm partial for XEP-0288 myself. Reducing the number of s2s connections reduces memory usage and CPU-intensive TLS handshakes.
-
flow
Zash, why only "partial"?
-
Zash
flow: s/I'm partial for/I like/
-
Zash
Something something preference for
-
pep.
There's some obvious irony or sarcasm that I'm not getting in the fulltext protoxep
-
pep.
Is it just to start a discussion?
-
Daniel
pep.: have you been here for yesterday's discussion with Guus?
-
pep.
I was. Have you read the document?
-
Daniel
Yes
-
Daniel
It's very dave
-
pep.
k
-
Guus
It serves the purpose.
-
larma
Guus, what is the purpose?
-
larma
Just registering a standard name for the field to abandon it later because actually using it in a standard at some point would cause incompatibilites?
-
Guus
Yes, no.
-
Guus
At least have a standard name with a defined set of functionality.
-
larma
I am missing the defined set of functionality in that ProtoXEP...
-
larma
I mostly read: don't use me because my behavior is undefined
-
MattJ
Maybe a defined field with undefined behaviour is better than an undefined field with undefined behaviour
-
pep.
Does it help with interoperability? Or is it even less useful than {xmpp:private.foo/mam-fulltext}fulltext? (as behaviour is undefined anyway)
-
MattJ
I'd like to expand it as I said yesterday, so it would have two fields
-
MattJ
One defined, one undefined
-
Daniel
well having a defined undefined field is certainly better than everyone using the undefined 'withtext'
-
pep.
The name of that field is obviously bad (no namespace), but how is as single defined undefined field better?
-
Daniel
it allows clients to implement search
-
Daniel
server side search (obviously)
-
pep.
with undefined behaviour
-
Daniel
yes
-
MattJ
That's evidently good enough for some people/use-cases
-
Daniel
to me that's good enough
-
pep.
k
-
Daniel
i mean in practice it won’t be that undefined
-
pep.
Well yes, the XEP says so :P
-
Daniel
i mean it says you can return nothing but then you have to buy everyone beer; which is like a total logistical nightmare
-
pep.
In practice it'll be somewhat undefined rules floating around
-
Daniel
i don’t think anyone would go through with that
-
pep.
Which is a nightmare for the external dev
-
larma
It's probably fine as long as you only send [A-Za-z0-9]+ 😉
-
MattJ
and don't send the words NOT, AND or OR
-
larma
even then it's unclear if it only searches in body or the full XML
-
larma
so you might see very unexpected results
-
pep.
And content doesn't only sit in body either
-
larma
Yeah, that too
-
larma
I can't imagine a proper UX for that
-
larma
at least nothing that could compete with Dino search UX 😉