[Snort-users] Sourcefire Tactics - New Licensing

Paul Schmehl pauls at ...6838...
Wed Mar 2 22:24:06 EST 2005

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Peter J Manis" <pmanis at ...5068...>
To: <spamtrap at ...9077...>; "'Snort Users Postings'" 
<snort-users at lists.sourceforge.net>
Sent: Wednesday, March 02, 2005 11:24 PM
Subject: Re: [Snort-users] Sourcefire Tactics - New Licensing

>I agree.  This is sad.  Essentially, what is happening here is taking the 
>open out of the opensource.

Don't be silly.

Have you ever given any thought to what open source means?  It means that 
you get to use, for free, something that someone else has spent time and 
effort and expertise on, with no compensation other than the pleasure of 
knowing that it benefits you and others.

>  First the rules from Sourcefire, and now they are trying to take Bleeding 
> Snort.

And you think this because?

>  I understand if Sourcefire is upset about a few individuals using their 
> rules, but what business do they have attempting to take Bleeding Snort 
> under their control?  This is clearly a coorporation hoax to monopolize 
> the development of Snort rules, first by licensing the Sourcefire rules, 
> and now trying to get Bleeding Snort to abide by their licenses!

Please!  Save the dramatics for theatre class.

>  Next will be Snort itself!

Really?  Marty reaffirmed Sourcefire's support for snort *and* the rules in 
an earlier post today.  The only thing that's changed is that you get the 
rules for free after a brief delay.  If you want them immediately, write 
your own, pay for theirs or find them on the internet.  (It's not like it's 
that hard.)

>  The end result will be the destruction of Snort in the opensource 
> community.  And I totally agree with the fact that if not for the 
> opensource community Snort or Sourcefire would not be what it is today and 
> to put any kind of a license on it is contradictory to its pricipal 
> founding.

Snort wouldn't be were it is today if Marty et. al. hadn't put untold hours 
and millions of dollars into its development.  If you don't think they 
deserve compensation for that, then I would ask you, when you graduate, to 
work for free and see how long it takes for your opinion to change.

A laborer is worthy of his hire.  Never forget that.

>  This is at least my opinion of the situation.

Opinions are OK, but they should be based on fact, not speculation and 

Please do us all a favor and trim your replies.

Paul Schmehl (pauls at ...6838...)
Adjunct Information Security Officer
University of Texas at Dallas
AVIEN Founding Member

More information about the Snort-users mailing list