On Sunday 22 November 2009, jaykumar hs wrote: > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: Ravi Shanker <[email protected]> > > > http://pragoti.org/node/3686 > > *The Free Software movement had raised an issue relating the possible > threat to sovereignty due to the UID project. This fear was raised in the > context of Microsoft's declaration of desire to be a partner on the UID > project. Microsoft as a corporation is tied to the laws of the United > States of America. Microsoft being a proponent of proprietorial software > would never let out the source code of the programs it would use on any > project. If Microsoft or any other provider partners on the UID project > there could be three possible situations: 1) In case of an adverse > international political situation a foreign government could order the > software vendor to lock or cripple the UID database in India – a case of > cyber-warfare; 2) it could lead to a situation of a vendor lock-in, whereby > each time the UIDAI wishes to make changes to the database it would require > the services of the software vendor, thus enabling the vendor continue to > earn rent income; 3) the use of proprietorial software could have the > unintended consequence of being incompatible with e-governance platforms > which already use Open Source programing. > > The UIDAI team responded to these concerns: 1) The Open Source model will > be used for the UID project and the Source Code will be under public > ownership; 2) all APIs will be standard and published APIs and can be > accessed using a variety of software; 3) Proprietorial software may have to > be used for specialized tasks like biometrics for that may be the cheaper > and more efficient choice at hand, but in such cases the contract with the > software firms will have sufficient safeguards to prevent any vendor > lock-in.*
1) What is the process by which they have arrived at the conclusion that "Proprietorial software may have to be used for specialized tasks like biometrics " 2) What are the safe guards that they propose 3) What plans do they have in place to replace such closed software. 4) It may be noted that data generated by such closed systems can be challenged in a court of law and may well be inadmisible. It may be noted that the FIPS system implemented by the FBI is publicly available. -- Rgds JTD _______________________________________________ network mailing list [email protected] http://lists.fosscom.in/listinfo.cgi/network-fosscom.in
