Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by mrpg on Sunday March 25 2018, @03:37AM   Printer-friendly
from the conversation++ dept.

Bunnie Huang, hardware hacker, wrote a brief article about transparency versus liability in the context of open hardware. He covers some of the tradeoffs without going into depth.

[...] Should a buggy library you develop be used in a home automation appliance that later causes a house to catch fire, you get to walk away scot-free, thanks to the expansive limited-liability clauses that are baked into every open source software licence.

Unfortunately, hardware makers don't get to enjoy that same luxury. Beyond guaranteeing a product free from workmanship or material defects, consumer protection law often requires an implied or express 'fitness for purpose' guarantee – that a piece of hardware is capable of doing what it's advertised to do. The latest controversy over Spectre/Meltdown indicates that more people than not feel CPU makers like Intel should be liable for these bugs, under the 'fitness for purpose' theory.

Open hardware makers should be deeply concerned. [...]

At BlackHat 2014, Dan was more specific regarding software and raised, with Poul-Henning Kamp, the idea that normal liability laws should also apply to software. But with that liability in place, exemptions should be available if vendors supply complete and buildable source code along with a license that allows disabling any functionality or code that the licensee decides against. Poul-Henning has called for a long time for changes to liability laws for software.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 26 2018, @07:14AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 26 2018, @07:14AM (#658269)

    I've seen lots of articles about how Microsoft got rid of their testing teams when they developed Windows 10. That's why the whole telemetry disaster came to be in the first place. All Windows 10 users are beta testers, and telemetry automatically uploads test results to Microsoft servers.

    As such, Windows 10 should be viewed as less tested than previous Microsoft products such as Vista and Windows ME.