1·
3 days agoHmmh. I’m not entirely satisfied with any of them. Crowdsec is a bit too complex and involved for my taste. And oftentimes there’s no good application config floating around on the internet, neither do I get any sane defaults from my Linux distribution. Whereas fail2ban is old and eats up way too much resources for what it’s doing. And all of it is a bit too error-prone(?) As far as I remember I had several instances when I thought I had set it up correctly, but it didn’t match anything. Or it was looking for some logfile per default but my program wrote to the SystemD journal. So nowadays, I’ll double-check everything. I wish programs like sshd and webapps came with that kind of security built in in some foolproof way.
This is the permissive vs copyleft debate. And it’s old as time. I suppose there’s a lot of nuance with licensing. If you’re a company at the receiving end, you probably love permissive licenses. They’re easy, offer the maximum amount of flexibility and freedom. It’s so short you probably don’t even need a team of lawyers… If you write software, it’s a bit more complicated. Do you want to cater to those people, make it as easy as possible to adopt your software? Then maybe consider BSD/Apache/MIT. Do you want to build a community, stop your competitors from just taking code? Want to try to ensure it stays open? Then maybe consider a copyleft license.
I sometimes don’t care. Write some stuff for me (as a hobby) but that’s my entire motivation. I don’t care what people do with the results of my weekend of effort. Never plan to hire a lawyer or bother with it in case something happrns with it. Or it’s just a pile of snippets. I’ll dump it for other people to use and release that either WTFPL or some other permissive license. People can do whatever they like with it. With the stuff I’m a bit more proud of, or I plan to return to, I’ll choose AGPL.