In Germany, there are growing concerns that IT usage is at risk due to 
widespread lock-in caused by using closed-source products of major software 
companies like Microsoft or Oracle. For this reason, the German Informatics 
Society (GI) <https://gi.de/> has started a working group on Digital 
Sovereignty <https://pak-digs.gi.de/>, which intends to find and show ways 
out of this dependency on American and Chinese products.

The most promising direction, in my opinion, is to switch from Closed to 
Open Source, wherever possible. For this reason, I have joined this working 
group, and I am currently preparing a presentation on Qubes for our next 
session, showing that Qubes can be used as a valuable Open Source tool for 
a migration from a closed Windows environment into the Open Source world. 
In the Qubes Forum, I already posted a short paper that I wrote for this 
working group, describing what Qubes is and how it can be used to get away 
from the lock-ins.

In this context, two questions have come up already. One is, if and how the 
Qubes team would be interested in cooperation with this working group, 
which might be profitable for both sides. The other question came from the 
consideration that Qubes shows a degree of resilience that currently cannot 
be found in most / any other desktop systems. The EU has now created a "Cyber 
Resilience ACT (CRA)" 
<https://berthub.eu/articles/posts/eu-cra-what-does-it-mean-for-open-source/>, 
which intends to ensure a certain level of quality for IT products, and 
currently, there are investigations, on how this can be applied to Open 
Source products. If this is done well, Qubes might qualify for a CRA 
certification, which could help to get more organizations to use Qubes.

In this context, I got the following letter from another member of the 
working group. I am asking if you are interested in this activity and could 
perhaps help with the enclosed questionnaire. Here is the letter, and I 
will gladly give your input to the working group.

--------------------------------
Dear Gerhard, 

today, I am contact you to pls forward the following questions to the 
developers of Qubes OS, which I think will be in the scope of the coming EU 
Cyber Resilience Act. Response in due time will be highly appreciated. 

I am contributing to this project with BSI and will be happy to answer any 
question about this initiative. 

Many thanks for your support and best Regards, 
    Peter 

--------------------------------------- 

Subject: CRA questionnaire - Your input is needed to enrich the debate 

As part of the German BSI "Dialog für Cybersicherheit", the Free Software 
Foundation Europe (FSFE) proposed a workstream on the role of Cyber 
Resilience Act (CRA) for Open Source that is now being implemented [1]. In 
this workstream, we will work on clarifying open questions regarding CRA 
implementation together with stakeholders from the Free Software community, 
also known as Open-Source community. For this, we kindly ask for your 
input. 

We will be looking at how Open-Source manufactures and stewards come 
together, what their cooperation can and should look like, and what 
requirements arise in the process. The CRA leaves us at this point with 
some uncertainties we like to see clarified. 

We like to encourage you to join in and help us with your personal 
experience in the Open-Source World. With your input, we want to identify 
pain points and work to derive  clarifications to eventually improve our 
understanding and help the Open-Source community with CRA compliance. 

We will first work on a questionnaire aimed at future stewards and 
manufacturers to ask for their views on CRA implementation and 
collaboration. Answers to the questionnaire will be assessed by the 
workstream participants and will be publicly anonymous. 

Since our workstream efforts are bound to a schedule, we highly appreciate 
your answer before 2025-02-10 so that we can assess all comments and 
suggestions incoming on fair ground. 

**A few thoughts and organizational considerations:** 

\* It is not about quantity but quality, we want to talk to experts as much 
as possible. 

\* It is about realistic assessments - we do not need maximum demands but 
real, pragmatic proposals and assessments. With the funding question in 
particular, we need realistic estimates of the expected costs and 
requirements. 

\* Our aim is for stewards and manufacturers to cooperate and work well 
together. We do not want to divide, we want to bring together. 

\* We are particularly interested in cases from the gray area and less in 
those where everything is clear. 

\* We want to enrich the debate with our results, sharing it with relevant 
decision makers and stakeholders 

**You can help us with this:** 

1) Do you have any questions that should be included in this questionnaire, 
that concern you and that we should investigate? 

2) To whom do you think we should send the questionnaire? Both individuals 
and organisations can be proposed. 

3)  Do you have experience, ideas or fears with how future stewards 
collaborate with manufacturers? We’d also like to speak directly with those 
responsible. If you have ideas or examples, concise ones are preferred. 

4) If you have specific suggestions and ideas, these are of course always 
welcome. 

[1] https://www.dialog-cybersicherheit.de/workstreams/ (in German) 

--------------------------------------- 

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"qubes-project" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to qubes-project+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/qubes-project/8ee9ba2d-5c3c-401a-9f72-042b2c91a1bdn%40googlegroups.com.

Reply via email to