Re: Revisiting the Nmap Public Source License

[Claudio Moretti <flyingstar16 () gmail com>]

Hello,

following Jan-Oliver Wagner considerations about section 3, I think there
may be a loophole:

One of the criteria states:

> Is designed specifically to execute Nmap and parse the results (as opposed
> to typical shell or execution-menu apps, which will execute anything you
> tell them to).

My concern is about the word "specifically": one could argue that a piece
of proprietary software is not "specifically" designed to execute Nmap, but
that it *could* execute other software that does port-scanning, but
incidentally it executes Nmap. It might be a little forced, but better safe
than sorry.

To be sure I wasn't saying anything particularly stupid, I researched
"specifically" (thank you, Google) [1] and I think I might be right.

In my opinion,

Is designed to execute Nmap and parse the results (as opposed to typical
> shell or execution-menu apps, which will execute anything you tell them
> to).

may be better (but more restrictive, of course, and it may create problems
with integration in open source projects - sorry Jan-Oliver Wagner).

Please, prove me wrong! :D

Claudio

[1] http://www.thefreedictionary.com/specifically
_______________________________________________
Sent through the dev mailing list
http://nmap.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
Archived at http://seclists.org/nmap-dev/