4 ms·
I get that a project want to sell licenses - but as a sibling comment states, Caddy appears to no longer be Free software, breaking freedom 1 (modify), 3 (distr
by e12e 9y ago
I get that a project want to sell licenses - but as a sibling comment states, Caddy appears to no longer be Free software, breaking freedom 1 (modify), 3 (distribute modified copies).
[ed: it appears I misunderstood, only the binaries are under eula - so Caddy is in the (somewhat) unique position of distributing non-free binaries and Free source code. Kind of like a gpled iOS program I guess.]
In addition, I'd consider this a (small) security vulnerability: the presence of the ad header effectively screams Caddy to fingerprinting tools. There's a reason apache and friends have a "prod" header config/setting.
[ed: seems a bit cruel to force the most resourceresource-limited users to advertise details about their stack; presumably those that know enough to compile themselves might also have more resources to keep up to date on security issues etc]
- deftnerd 9y agoSynergy, the app that allows a computer to share its mouse and keyboard over the network to other computers, did a more aggressive move a few years ago. It's still technically GPL because you can compile it yourself, but they charge $20 for a binary license and to enable certain features. I have similar concerns. I practice good security but I also enjoy security through obscurity. I prefer to prevent my users from knowing what web server is serving their content. Now unless I start compiling from scratch, everyone will know I use Caddy and I don't like that. Alternative is to run Caddy behind HAProxy or Nginx or something similar that can strip those headers out. I think it's time to just rebuild and use Nginx again and try to get QUIC and automatic LetsEncrypt working.
- tempay 9y ago> Alternative is to run Caddy behind HAProxy or Nginx or something similar that can strip those headers out. The EULA specifically states that this isn't permitted.