I’ve been thinking about transparency and security in the public sector. Do you think all government software and platforms should be open source?
Some countries have already made progress in this area:
- Estonia: digital government services with open and auditable APIs.
- United Kingdom: several open source government projects and systems published on GitHub.
- France and Canada: policies encouraging the use of free and open source software in public agencies.
Possible benefits:
- Full transparency: anyone can audit the code, ensuring there is no corruption, hidden flaws, or unauthorized data collection.
- Enhanced security: public reviews help identify vulnerabilities quickly.
- Cost reduction: less dependency on private vendors and lower spending on proprietary licenses.
- Flexibility and innovation: public agencies can adapt systems to their needs without relying on external solutions.
Possible challenges:
- Maintenance and updating of complex systems.
- Protecting sensitive data without compromising citizen privacy.
- Political or bureaucratic resistance to opening the code.
Do you think this could be viable in the governments of your countries? How could we start making this a reality globally?
Yes, I think all
governmentsoftware should be FOSS.(Ok, ok. Not all. I don’t think it should be mandatory to distribute software. But if you do distribute software, I think the source code should be required to come with it and there shouldn’t be any intellectual property restrictions on modifying it or distributing it, with or without modifications so long as you include the source code. Aside from that, distributing versions with malware included without sufficiently advertising that fact should be considered some sort of fraud or vandalism.)
But I’m under no illusion that there’s any likelihood of that happening any time in my lifetime. One can hope, though.
Of your “possible challenges”, the first two are complete fiction. FOSS would make it easier to properly maintain and update systems, complex or otherwise. And databases and code are two different things. Beyond that, I’ll say that distributing software only in compiled form doesn’t make anything more secure or hide anything about how the code works.
Edit: Oh, I also think a right to attribution is a good thing. It can be done poorly. (Like some of the earlier BSD licenses that would result in pages and pages of attribution for a single code project.) But done well, I think it’s a worthwhile thing.
Within reason.
A nice little application to calculate tax and benefits? For sure.
A detailed model on how a nuclear attack would behave depending on the wind direction and tidal waves? That shit needs to be kept secret.
That should def be open source
Couldn’t people look through the code for exploits?
Yes, that is a very good thing.
It would mean that we a have a lot more people who can find exploits, report them and repair them.
Sure, some would find exploits and use them, but you would have more people finding and fixing them
I think all public funds that generate data and/or software needs to be public.
The notion that maintenance is an issue is a red herring. Proprietary software purchased by government requires ongoing support contracts right until the vendor discontinues the product and leaves the public funds to prop up another billionaire.
Open source would also stimulate the economy since businesses could benefit from the project and use or apply it to their use, something which currently requires more investment with the same vendor.
Another can of worms is dealing with proprietary technology. A lot of software is built in partnership with private companies. They likely don’t want to give out their competitive edge for free.
I think more government software should be open source, but I don’t think it’s possible to make all software open source.
All publicly available software should be free and open-source, ten toes down.
Do you mean software created by the government, or simply used by the government?
In the US, I believe the standard is that the software would be public domain if it’s an official government publication.
Removed by mod
This is due to a simple mental hang up people have.
They want to blame/punish someone for the failure.
In an open source project, there isn’t really any one you can fine, GPL clearly states that the software is provided without warranty.
If you hire a company to make a program for you, you pay them to not only build the program for you, but to also accept liability for errors.
And that is often far more important to management than if the code is open
yeah i think all government software available to the public should be free and open source.
Public money, public code.
Its really that simple
Imagine governments adding to foss. Would be awesome.
Any even partially publicly funded government code should be open sourced, just like the new rules for public funding and publishing of scientific research. If people actually paid attention this would crush my former local government department.
deleted by creator
Ken Thompson’s nightmare scenario was solved by a couple people who were enjoying their hobby in their free time
Could you elaborate further, please? I didn’t found anything about this story
deleted by creator
Public funds spent on anything that generates something that could be considered “intellectual property” should be public domain. Beyond software my first thought is pharmaceutical and general medical research.
Why would it be more difficult to maintain and update a complex system?
They don’t have to accept outsider contributions on their mainline nor employ less people to work on it.
Estonia: digital government services with open and auditable APIs.
What makes an API auditable?
Someone can look at it, it’s implementation, and verify it does what it claims.
