On Sun, Jan 16, 2022 at 1:49 PM Dominik Psenner <[email protected]> wrote:

> I have no intention to tear apart the document. I am dealing with non
> technical fellows on a daily basis and from my experience the document
> still too technical.
>

That's what I was afraid of, and what I very much want to fix.

Could a comparison with a house be of help? A house is something specially
> made according to the specifications of the owner and adapted according to
> meet its requirements and fulfill needs. A house can be built of bricks,
> stone, wood, .. and there are various things that nees to be assembled by
> experts of their own right. Maybe there is a good analogy to find what
> logging means for a house. It could be a printer that protocols to paper
> what the house is doing, a door gets opened and closed, water that is
> running and stops to do so, an oven thats baking,...
>
> If one gets to understand what log4j is in this house, it is surely easier
> to explain java, jndi and ldap with analogies as well?
>

I actually don't think we go there.  Essentially there is a recall on a
thingamabob.   Most people don't know how cars work either, but when they
get a recall, they take it in to get fixed.  What's different here is that
it is not just one model or even make of a car that is getting recalled,
but rather a large number of different manufacturers that are affected.
And they are wondering why this is, and want to make sure that it doesn't
happen again.

A good analogy could be electric cables interconnecting various components
> so that they can fulfill their purpose, ie switches to turn on/off lights.
> And hey, there are also pluggable components like power plugs where new
> stuff can be plugged into. :-) What if someone could plug something,
> unnoticed, with an adapter nobody thought of?
>

Unfortunately, I don't know of a good analogy for open source.

Warm regards
> --
> Sent from my phone. Typos are a kind gift to anyone who happens to find
> them.
>

- Sam Ruby

On Sun, Jan 16, 2022, 19:25 Matt Sicker <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Building blocks could potentially be “components”; that term applies to
> > physical supply chains, too.
> >
> > Emphasizing that the volunteer developers are still professionals,
> > academics, etc., is certainly important. I’ve seen enough people aghast
> how
> > we at the Log4j project are all unpaid; many of us have spent countless
> > hours at work using and extending Log4j where we’ve been able to
> contribute
> > our changes back to the project. Sure, many of us also work on this in
> our
> > spare time, but the volunteer aspect is strictly that Apache doesn’t pay
> us.
> >
> > JNDI can potentially be described as a standard programming component
> used
> > for looking up directory information from LDAP and other similar
> > technology. It may help to mention that LDAP is a directory service
> (maybe
> > they’re familiar with Active Directory or some other phonebook-like
> > directory service).
> > --
> > Matt Sicker
> >
> > > On Jan 16, 2022, at 11:55, Sam Ruby <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Sun, Jan 16, 2022 at 12:40 PM Gilles Sadowski <[email protected]
> >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > >> Le dim. 16 janv. 2022 à 17:13, Sam Ruby <[email protected]> a
> > écrit :
> > >>>
> > >>> In discussions with US Senate Staffers, it became apparent that there
> > is
> > >>> a need for a less technical description of both open source
> > >>
> > >> Presenting the rationale for open source to code that "does not
> > >> provide [...] competitive advantage" is self-deprecating IMHO.
> > >>
> > >
> > > Fair.  Some background: many of the people the ASF interacted with last
> > > week came in with the impression that open source software was
> primarily
> > > written by amateur hobbyists with too much spare time on their hands.
> > > After all, why would any business want to give away their hard own
> work?
> > >
> > > Here's what we are up against, and this includes a quote from the
> person
> > > who called the meeting at the White House:
> > >
> > > Log4j is open-source software that’s maintained by a gaggle of
> volunteer
> > > programmers as a part of the nonprofit Apache Software Foundation, one
> > > among dozens of open-source initiatives which have change into an
> > important
> > > part of worldwide commerce.
> > >
> > > Neuberger described open-source software as “a witch’s brew” that’s
> > “built
> > > by volunteers, broadly used, and not managed”.
> > >
> > > --
> > >
> >
> https://mywinet.com/some-federal-systems-affected-by-software-flaw-us-official-says/
> > > Is there a better way to capture the motivation of businesses to
> > contribute
> > > to open source?
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >>> and the
> > >>> Log4J vulnerability.
> > >>
> > >> Not using "jargon" in that section makes it more difficult to follow
> for
> > >> programmers while probably not any clearer for non-programmers.
> > >> Since "code" and "library" have been defined in the first section, the
> > >> usual terms could then be used afterwards as appropriate.
> > >>
> > >
> > > I'm not convinced.  Yes, building block is jarring to me, even though I
> > > know what it meant.  Think about how jarring code or library would be
> to
> > a
> > > reader for which these are not common uses.
> > >
> > > I picked up the term building block from a lawyer who is experienced in
> > > these matters.  He repeated back to us what he heard us say, and used
> > this
> > > term.
> > >
> > >> I've taken a first stab at this, and placed it here:
> > >>>
> > >>
> >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/COMDEV/Log4j+vulnerability+background
> > >>
> > >> s/Software Build of Materials/Software Bill of Materials/
> > >> ?
> > >>
> > >
> > > Fixed.  Thanks!  Feel free to directly update the page
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >> Best regards,
> > >> Gilles
> > >>
> > >
> > > - Sam Ruby
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >>> As always, this is on a wiki.  You know what you need to do!
> > >>>
> > >>> - Sam Ruby
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> > [email protected]
> > >> For additional commands, e-mail:
> > >> [email protected]
> > >>
> > >>
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> [email protected]
> > For additional commands, e-mail:
> > [email protected]
> >
> >
>

Reply via email to