Skip to main content
83 votes
Accepted

Is GitHub "releases" section safe from malicious code? To be specific, does the binary match the code in a restrictive way?

There are no guarantees that the uploaded artefacts match the source code in the repository. That something is on GitHub does not mean that it can be trusted. You need to also trust the maintainers of ...
amon's user avatar
  • 39.1k
21 votes
Accepted

Is there any way to assert that a source code correspond to a compiled code?

The naive answer is, of course, to build it yourself and verify that your built binary is identical to the binary supplied by the other party. So much for the theory. In practice, this can be ...
apsillers's user avatar
  • 36.3k
18 votes
Accepted

MIT-licensed app without the source code

The MIT license doesn't require source code to be published. It only requires that the license notice is kept intact. MIT-licensed binaries without source code are rare – no source kinda defeats the ...
amon's user avatar
  • 39.1k
11 votes
Accepted

BSD 3-Clause: where to place license for binary installation?

You are required to attribute the authors of any libraries you use, regardless of whether this is explicitly required by the libraries' licenses. The BSD license only mentions a suggested place for ...
amon's user avatar
  • 39.1k
8 votes
Accepted

Is there a free open source version of Android SDK available for use?

The source code itself is available here: https://android.googlesource.com/platform/sdk/+/master/ There is Android Rebuilds project which provides binaries built from this source code without non-free ...
8 votes
Accepted

Can a quine be distributed as binary only and be open source?

This is categorically fine under the MIT license (as long as you follow basic attribution and license-preservation requirements), since the MIT license allows you to distribute the work (and modified ...
apsillers's user avatar
  • 36.3k
8 votes
Accepted

Are shell scripts considered binaries for licensing purposes?

The parenthetical (and not binary) from the license summary you quote is derived from the end of the second paragraph of the Boost license (emphasis mine): The copyright notices in the Software and ...
apsillers's user avatar
  • 36.3k
8 votes

Are shell scripts considered binaries for licensing purposes?

There is a definition in GPL what 'source code' means, and I think this is basically the understanding in the entire industry, so not specific to GPL: The “source code” for a work means the preferred ...
Martin_in_AUT's user avatar
6 votes
Accepted

Shipping GPL'd binaries in commercial product

This will be partly down to interpretation, and IANAL. However this is how I'd read it: that you can indeed distribute in the way you have described, because all you're doing is executing and reading ...
Tim Malone's user avatar
  • 2,150
6 votes
Accepted

What does the binary blob in the linux kernel do?

Most of the binary blobs in Linux are in device drivers, and most of those are in WiFi drivers. Their function is to be the operating code for the hardware on the device; unless they're loaded when ...
MadHatter's user avatar
  • 49.6k
5 votes

Open source software: How do I know whether it uses the actual code?

It’s not possible to validate it 100% but you can get close. As a prerequisite, the app needs to support reproducible builds. That means you need the information how to compile and package the target ...
otherguy's user avatar
  • 151
5 votes

Changing the binary/project name under BSD 3-clause license

Yes, you can change both the name of the project and the name of the executable. The 3-clause BSD license gives you permission to make changes to the project and that includes the changes you want to ...
Bart van Ingen Schenau's user avatar
5 votes
Accepted

How does Linux with pre-installed binaries comply with binary redistribution license clause?

Generally, it's handled by the distro's package management utility. For example, if I examine the contents of postgresql-libs on my desktop (Fedora 28), I find that: [me@risby personal]$ rpm -ql ...
MadHatter's user avatar
  • 49.6k
5 votes

Does distributing GPL software along with binary image force the binary image to be GPL too?

Generally, the output of a piece of software is not covered by the piece of software's licence, because the output is not a derivative work of the piece of software. Using a GPL-covered program to ...
MadHatter's user avatar
  • 49.6k
5 votes
Accepted

Use of GPL licensed driver in commercial project

There are some legal implications for using a GPLv2 licensed driver, but they are not very onerous. The main requirement is that you inform your customers about the fact that GPLv2 licensed software ...
Bart van Ingen Schenau's user avatar
5 votes
Accepted

Using dynamically linked library with BSD 3-clause License

No, you do not need to change the license of your dll and you do not need to publish any source code. In contrast to a strong copyleft, non-permissive license like the GPL the BSD licenses are instead ...
Mans Gunnarsson's user avatar
5 votes

Do licenses actually apply to the source code or product itself?

As far as copyright law is concerned, source code and object code (i.e. the compiled program) are equivalent. So even if a license talks about one and not the other, or only mentions "software", the ...
congusbongus's user avatar
  • 8,949
5 votes
Accepted

License where somebody can distribute modified binaries but if they do I can disassemble them and help myself to the changes

As long as the binary is under an open source license, you would have rights to disassemble it and distribute the results (optionally modified). However, with a permissive license like BSD or MIT/X11, ...
apsillers's user avatar
  • 36.3k
5 votes
Accepted

Is it possible to use library as private confidential in GPL 3.0 Project

Note: for the purposes of this answer, I'm assuming that linking a codebase to a library to form an executable means the executable is a copyright derivative of codebase and library. Particularly for ...
MadHatter's user avatar
  • 49.6k
4 votes
Accepted

Distribute SWF (binary) files with open source license?

Yes you can; you are the copyright holder so you can apply whatever license you want. However, I recommend that you avoid the licenses designed for source code (such as GPL, BSD and so on) and choose ...
congusbongus's user avatar
  • 8,949
4 votes
Accepted

What happens to Cloud providers, if I download a GPL Binaries from cloud storage service?

... I upload a GPL binary to google drive and then provide a link for everyone ... You are the distributor here, Not Google. Also Google's Terms and conditions mentions scenarios like this, and ...
Prajwal's user avatar
  • 380
4 votes
Accepted

Can I bundle a GPL-2 binary (Pandoc) with my GPL-3 app?

Pandoc is available under the terms of the GPL version 2 or greater so the different versions are not relevant: you can just use the terms of the GPLv3. Even then, bundling a GPLv2 program with a ...
amon's user avatar
  • 39.1k
4 votes
Accepted

Using a FOSS license for binaries created in a hex editor

Most permissive licenses, like MIT and BSD, do not require you to provide source code. There is nothing in your workflow that prevents you from applying one of those licenses to your work. A license ...
Bart van Ingen Schenau's user avatar
3 votes
Accepted

Sign and distribute unmodified GNU GPLv2, MIT and Apache2 Linux packages

Does the fact that I sign and distribute runtime & SDK used to write the component oblige me to change the component's license to MIT / Apache2? No, software under Apache 2 or MIT/Expat/X11 ...
apsillers's user avatar
  • 36.3k
3 votes

Apache 2.0: What licensing-related steps do I have to make when using software via package manager?

If you're shipping the dependencies, then you must fulfil their license terms, such as including the license notices with your software. How to do this properly depends on the context of your software....
amon's user avatar
  • 39.1k
3 votes

What does it mean for a closed source project to have a permissive licence (CC BY-NC)?

CC BY-NC is not a permissive license. Neither the FSF nor the OSI approved it, so it’s not a free software license nor an open source license. The reason is the "NC" part: the licensed work may not be ...
unor's user avatar
  • 5,670
3 votes

Can I use GPL 3.0 license project as library to my private project with MIT license

You can't - the whole point of the GPL is that it is "viral" and forces the whole program which uses any GPL code to be open source. Specifically, the GPL Section 6 requires that you ...
Philip Kendall's user avatar
2 votes
Accepted

Can I have the source code of my Python/C++ project under MIT/BSD/Apache2.0 and its PyPI binary wheel under GPLv2?

Can I use a more permissive licence (e.g., BSD/MIT/Apache) for my source code on GitHub, and at the same time use a GPLv2 license for its PyPI binary distribution? Yes, you can. You can even create a ...
Bart van Ingen Schenau's user avatar
2 votes

Licensing a closed-source game to allow redistribution in an otherwise open-source project

The 2-clause BSD license is a permissive license, so from that side there is no expectation that the license is incompatible. There is a possibility that the license of the binary-only code forbids ...
Bart van Ingen Schenau's user avatar
2 votes
Accepted

Is it possible to be open source but restrict distribution of compiled binaries?

IANAL/IANYL. That said, the only halfway house I can think of is the path that Red Hat have taken with access to RHEL. If you want to get precompiled binaries (of other people's GPL'ed software) ...
MadHatter's user avatar
  • 49.6k

Only top scored, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible