Openwall GNU/*/Linux - a small security-enhanced Linux distro for servers
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 2015 00:44:32 +0300
From: Solar Designer <solar@...nwall.com>
To: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: Kerberoast for John

On Mon, Sep 28, 2015 at 11:29:53PM +0200, Michael Kramer wrote:
> I wasn't sure which license I could use since Kerberoast is registered
> under the Apache License. So I can just change to the BSD license?

If you build upon someone else's work closely enough that their
copyright (as well as your copyright) applies to your derived work, then
you have to list them as a copyright holder, and the license has to be
either their original license or a license that the original one can be
changed to (e.g., our cut-down BSD can be changed to an N-clause BSD,
but not vice-versa).

To answer your question more directly: no, you can't change from Apache
license to our cut-down BSD license, if what you have is a derived work
and the original author's copyright still applies.  In that case, you
have to list them (Tim Medin?) as a copyright holder (along with
yourself), and keep their original license intact (mention it like you
did in the .c file).

However, it is unclear to me that what you have in the .c file is a
derived work.  It looks like you're reusing analysis rather than reusing
code (or merely translating it from one language to another), and it
will deviate even further as you proceed to adjust the code as per
magnum's suggestions.

For the script, yours appears to be closer to being a derived work
(direct reuse of pieces of the script, right?)  Did the original script
even have a copyright and license on it?  If so, add those (and yours).
If not, ask the original author to add those, or re-code so that the
original author's copyright doesn't apply.

Thanks,

Alexander

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Your e-mail address:

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux - Powered by OpenVZ