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
Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.