Yes, this has been on the message board before,
however, I am not at all convinced we are getting
consistent information. 

1) There are a numerous amount of plugins the are
state GPL and use the sbm.inc file.

2) I ask Renuad about this and he states "some" are
GPL.

3) I mention three specfic plugins below. He states 
ssh_get_info.nasl and rpm.inc are not GPL. 

However, if you read below, you see Renuad replies a
"yes" to GPL on "some" of the smb_nt.... plugins. 

Also, these GPL plugins use smb_nt.inc.

4)Then you see this in CVS (how convienent on timing):
#####
CVS log for nessus-plugins/scripts/smb_nt.inc
Revision 1.76 / (view) - annotate - [select for diffs]
, Thu Jan 6 17:36:15 2005 UTC (22 hours, 58 minutes
ago) by renaud 
Branch: MAIN 
CVS Tags: HEAD 
Changes since 1.75: +4 -1 lines 
Diff to previous 1.75 
(C) clarification
#####

Does this "(C) clarification" now mean that the
smb.inc
cannot be used to produce GPL plugins?

--- M J <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Renuad,
> 
> I see plugins using ssh_get_info that are GPL posted
> by you in CVS.  So you get to cherry pick/decide
> what
> plugins are GPL? I know and respect that you have a
> MAJORITY in the contribution to Nessus... Haven't
> others though too? I see something horribly wrong in
> your approach here...
> 
> Based on what I have read in GPLv2, I'm coming to
> the
> conclusion ANYTHING written in NASL should be GPL. A
> plugin requires libnasl (which is 100% GPL'd) to
> work
> correctly or matter of fact to work at all...
> Doesn't
> that make EVERY plugin GPL (aka Derivative Work)? 
> 
> I've been reading GPLv2 over and over here...
> 
> It's funny, the ONLY license that came across prior
> to
> your Dec 7th change is GPLv2. Can you please direct
> me
> to the license (Pre Dec 7th) that that ACTUALLY
> states
> otherwise?
> 
> I'm sorry, I don't have a lawyer at my side. If I
> did,
> I wouldn't be asking you for direction on this
> issue.
> If it takes a lawyer to tell me what I can/can't do
> with a supposed/kind of sorta GPL code...we'll
> that's
> just plain wrong. ESPECIALLY WHEN SOMEONE WANTS TO
> APPROPRIATELY CONTRIBUTE TO THE PROJECT!!!
> 
> This comes from:
>
http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#GPLRequireSourcePostedPublic
> 
> I heard that someone got a copy of a GPL'ed program
> under another license. Is this possible? 
> 
> The GNU GPL does not give users permission to attach
> other licenses to the program. But the copyright
> holder for a program can release it under several
> different licenses in parallel. One of them may be
> the
> GNU GPL. The license that comes in your copy,
> assuming
> it was put in by the copyright holder and that you
> got
> the copy legitimately, is the license that applies
> to
> your copy. 
> 
> I would like to release a program I wrote under the
> GNU GPL, but I would like to use the same code in
> non-free programs. 
> 
> To release a non-free program is always ethically
> tainted, but legally there is no obstacle to your
> doing this. If you are the copyright holder for the
> code, you can release it under various different
> non-exclusive licenses at various times. 
> 
> 
> 
> --- Renaud Deraison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
> > On Wed, Jan 05, 2005 at 06:52:03AM -0800, M J
> wrote:
> > 
> > Hi,
> > 
> > > The reason i'm a bit confused here is becuase
> you
> > have
> > > certain plugins (smb_nt_....) that have the
> exact
> > same
> > > code (actual test code not description), however
> > have
> > > different copyrights and none have the mention
> of
> > GPL.
> > > Based on what I read in GPLv2, I see that kind
> of
> > > plugin is a GPL plugin, correct?
> > 
> > Some plugins are released under the GPL, so yes.
> > 
> > > My primary concern...
> > > If I write a Fedora check and use the
> > ssh_getinfo.nasl
> > > and the rpm.inc, do you consider that a GPL
> > plugin?
> > 
> > ssh_get_info.nasl is not under the GPL. Also if
> you
> > use rpm.inc, you use
> > Tenable code, so at that point you probably want
> to
> > see with your lawyer
> > regarding the legality of using the file.
> > 
> > 
> >                     -- Renaud
> >
> 
> 
> 
>               
> __________________________________ 
> Do you Yahoo!? 
> Read only the mail you want - Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard.
> 
> http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail 
> _______________________________________________
> Nessus mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://mail.nessus.org/mailman/listinfo/nessus
> 



                
__________________________________ 
Do you Yahoo!? 
Yahoo! Mail - Find what you need with new enhanced search.
http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250
_______________________________________________
Nessus mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.nessus.org/mailman/listinfo/nessus

Reply via email to