EFF and intrusion software regulation
To its credit, the EFF is better than a lot of other privacy groups like the ACLU or Privacy International. It at least acknowledges that regulating "evil" software can have unintended consequences on "good" software, that preventing corrupt governments from buying software also means blocking their dissidents from buying software to protect themselves. An example is this piece from several years ago that says:"First and foremost, we want to make sure we do not leave activists with fewer tools than they already have. Parliament must be mindful of legislation just based on types of technology because broadly written regulations could have a net negative effect on the availability of many general-purpose technologies and could easily harm very people that the regulations are trying to protect."But that does not stop the EFF from proposing such regulations.
In that same piece, the EFF first proposes rules for transparency. This will not stop the bad companies, but will be a burden on the legitimate companies that have no interesting in dealing with corrupt governments anyway. Most of this stuff is sold by small companies, like FinFisher, who focus on the "corrupt regime" market. They would not be embarrassed by transparency -- Continue reading
It's time to sign up for the exclusive 6WIND DemoFriday, featuring insights and analysis to the recently released NFV Report! Register now!
HP's NFV ambitions lead it to acquire early SDN startup ConteXtream.
Even the biggest of enterprise applications can be run from the cloud, Virtustream says.
Register for the UBIqube and Rayno Report Webinar today. Discover why a DevOps culture has become a necessity!