1
0
Fork 0
online-freedom/talk.tex

1793 lines
74 KiB
TeX

\documentclass[pdf,red]{beamer}
\mode<presentation>{}
\usetheme{Boadilla}
\usepackage{listings}
% hide pesky navigation
\setbeamertemplate{navigation symbols}{}
%% ideas:
%% etherpad
\newwrite\lecturenotes
\openout\lecturenotes=lecture.notes
\def\hangleft#1{%
\settowidth{\dimen0}{#1}%
\hspace*{-\dimen0}%
#1%
}
\def\slide#1#2{%
\begin{frame}
\lecturestart
}
\def\endslide{%
\end{frame}
\lectureend
}
% My ties attempt to keep sentences flowing across (rendered) line breaks,
% where a brief pause when eyes scan to the beginning of the next line will
% be okay.
%
% Emphasis in these blocks might mean a number of things, such as speaking
% loudly, or inserting pauses between each word.
\def\lecturestart{%
\makeatletter
\xdef\@@lecture@notes{}
\makeatsymbol
}
\def\lecture#1{\write\lecturenotes{\unexpanded{#1}}}
\def\todo#1{#1}
%% TODO: minified code is not source code
%% preamble
\title{Restore Online Freedom!}
\author{Mike Gerwitz}
\begin{document}
\begin{frame}
\titlepage
\lecture{I'm going to warn everyone upfront---this is a~talk about
problems. Many of them are fundamental problems that don't quite
have a~solution yet. Others are problems that you can address
immediately, both as a user and as a web developer. I hope to
provide perspective that sufficiently shocks and motivates; to
make a difference, both big and small.}
\end{frame}
\begin{frame}{Who am I?}
\lecture{So my name's Mike Gerwitz,}
\begin{itemize}
\item Long-time free software hacker and activist
\lecture{I'm a long-time free software hacker and activist}
\item GNU volunteer, software evaluator, and part of maintainers team
\lecture{and volunteer for the GNU project. I'm part of the small
team of evaluators for GNU project submissions, and I'm what
I'd called a trainee on the maintainers team.}
\item Author of GNU ease.js
\lecture{I'm also the author of GNU ease.js, a classical
object-oriented framework for JavaScript licensed under the
GNU GPLv3+.}
\lecture{I've been involved in web development to at least some capacity}
\item 10+ years of web development
\lecture{for well over ten years. But possibly \emph{just} as
importantly, I've been a \emph{user} of the web for even
longer. Now, I'm 26---I'm not part of the generation that
was swiping at newspapers when they were babies, wondering
why nothing was happening, but I did grow up with the
Internet.}
\begin{itemize}
\item<2-> The Web has \only<2>{changed}\only<3->{{\bf worsened}} a lot
in 10 years
\lecture{And as I'm sure all of you here can attest to---and I'm
really stating the obvious here---the Internet has changed a
\emph{lot} in the past ten years. In fact, it's had a
version change---the so-called ``Web 2.0''! Which, to
clarify, is just jargon; there's not actually a version
change.}
\lecture{But I suppose I could phrase this in another way: the
Internet has also \emph{worsened} a lot in the past ten
years. A version bump isn't always an upgrade.}
\end{itemize}
\end{itemize}
\end{frame}
\begin{frame}{``But the Web is great!''}
\lecture{``But the web is great!'', you'll hear people say.}
\begin{itemize}
\item<2-> The Web has improved \emph{technically}
\lecture{Yes, the web has improved \emph{technically}---}
\begin{itemize}
\item<2-> Modern software on the web rivals traditional desktop
software
\end{itemize}
\lecture{you can do things on the web today that were
\emph{unfathomable} ten years ago. I don't think any
rational person who's seen the~transition over the past
ten-plus years would argue that.}
\lecture{But we're talking about \emph{freedom}.}
\item<3-> The truth is---the web has become alarmingly hostile and
freedom-denying toward users
\lecture{The web has become increasing \emph{hostile} and
freedom-denying toward its users. And that's not progress;
technical advancements are great, but \emph{not when they
deny users their freedoms}.}
\item<4-> Freedom trumps all.
\lecture{\emph{Freedom trumps all.} So we can say that, while Web~2.0
was a \emph{technical} upgrade, it has been a steadily
progressing \emph{downgrade} for users' freedoms.}
\end{itemize}
\end{frame}
\begin{frame}{What freedoms are at stake?}
\lecture{So what freedoms are at stake? Well,}
% TODO: start at 0, skip to 4 after four freedoms
\begin{enumerate}
\item<+-> Four Freedoms;
\lecture{In most every case, the four freedoms. And as you'll see,
unlike with traditional desktop software, these aren't easy
freedoms to obtain.}
%\item Freedom to use software of your choice to view webpages;
\item<+-> Freedom of choice (interoperability);
\lecture{The freedom of \emph{choice}---that is, the freedom to use
the software of your choosing to access resources or services
online. Interoperability.}
%\item Freedom to process and adapt (within realm of Fair Use);
\item<+-> Freedom to automate and adapt (Fair Use);
\lecture{As an extension, the freedom to download resources for
indexing, scraping, offline backup, and other personal
uses. This is also essential to a number of important
activities covered under Fair Use.}
%\item Freedom to browse with relative anonymity and privacy;
\item<+-> Freedom of isolation;
\lecture{Freedom of isolation. And by isolation, I mean relative
anonymity and privacy---individual websites of the past
really didn't correlate your visits with visits on other
sites all that often, unless they were owned by the same
company.}
%\item Freedom to do your own computing;
\item<+-> Freedom to do your own computing;
\lecture{Freedom to \emph{do your own} computing, rather than having a
service do it on your behalf. Services as Software
Substitutes are particular problems.}
%\item Freedom to control your own data;
\item<+-> Freedom of ownership.
\lecture{The freedom to own and control your own data is a corollary
of the previous freedom. It's difficult to have that control
when you might not even be in possession of your data to
begin with.}
\end{enumerate}
\lecture{Now, this is not an exhaustive list; I unfortunately only have so
much time to present. But these freedoms should be sufficient to
illustrate the core issues.}
\end{frame}
\defverbatim{\gnuhost}{%
\small
\begin{verbatim}
$ host gnu.org
gnu.org has address 208.118.235.148
\end{verbatim}
}
\defverbatim{\gnurequest}{%
\small
\begin{verbatim}
$ curl -v https://gnu.org/
[...]
> GET / HTTP/1.1
> User-Agent: curl/7.35.0
> Host: gnu.org
> Accept: */*
\end{verbatim}
}
\defverbatim{\gnuresp}{%
\small
\begin{verbatim}
$ curl -v https://gnu.org/
[...some lines removed]
< HTTP/1.1 200 OK
< Date: Wed, 10 Feb 2016 19:45:21 GMT
< Server: Apache/2.4.7
< Cache-Control: max-age=0
< Expires: Wed, 10 Feb 2016 19:45:21 GMT
< Transfer-Encoding: chunked
< Content-Type: text/html
< Content-Language: en
<
{ [data not shown]}
\end{verbatim}
}
\begin{frame}[fragile]{Understanding the Web}
\lecture{Alright; so before we can really talk intelligently on these
issues, what is the Web? Quick summary:}
\begin{overlayarea}{\textwidth}{\textheight}
\begin{itemize}
\item<1-> Usually involves a web browser
\lecture{Normally when we talk about the ``Web'', as opposed to the
``Internet'' as a whole, we're referring to something that you
would access using a web browser. That web browser might be
a graphical browser like GNU IceCat, or it might be a
text-mode browser like w3m. But you don't \emph{have} to use
a web browser---you might even use \tt{wget} or \tt{curl}
directly and look at the plain text of the document, or parse
it with a script.}
\begin{enumerate}
\item <2-> User enters a URL or clicks on a link
\only<2>{\par(e.g. \url{https://gnu.org/})}
\lecture{The user first indicates the resource that they want to
``browse'' to using a URL, which stands for ``Uniform
Resource Locator''; it contains both a protocol and a
hostname. Let's take ``gnu.org'' as an example.}
\item<3-> Browser resolves domain to a host IP address (DNS lookup)
\only<3>{\gnuhost}
\lecture{The browser then resolves the domain name---\tt{gnu.org} in
this case---to the IP address of the server hosting the
resource. This is called a DNS---or ``Domain Name
Server''---lookup. The result may be one IP, or it may be
multiple. The easiest way to resolve a hostname on a
GNU/Linux system without worrying about what a DNS record
is, is to use the \tt{host} command. In the case of
\tt{gnu.org}, it resolves to a single IP address.}
\item<4-> For HTTP(S), brower sends HTTP request to host on port
80/443
\only<4>{\gnurequest}
\lecture{I mentioned a protocol. The beginning of the URL is
usually HTTP or HTTPS; we don't care about others for this
talk. The former transfers data in plaintext whereas the
later is encrypted using SSL. The browser sends an HTTP
request to the host requesting the resource.}
\item<5-> Server responds with resource
\only<5>{\gnuresp}
\lecture{The server responds. That response might be affirmative,
it might be an error, it might be garbage; let's assume
that it was a successful response.}
\item<6-> Browser recursively loads all resources referenced by
webpage
\begin{itemize}
\item<6-> Stylesheets, Images, Scripts, etc.
\end{itemize}
\only<6>{\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{images/gnu-resources.png}}
\lecture{This is the meat of the talk. The browser then recursively
processes all resources referenced by \emph{that}
resource. Most often, these include images, stylesheets,
and scripts.}
\end{enumerate}
\item<7-> Distributed network (``web'') of computers
\lecture{So fundamentally, the web is a distributed network of
computers that serve resources. Resources can be anything
from your conventional web page, to a program that runs in
your browser, to a live video stream of this talk.}
\end{itemize}
\end{overlayarea}
\end{frame}
\begin{frame}{Interoperability}
\begin{itemize}
\item<1-> Fundamental building blocks are standardized (W3C)
\lecture{So the Web is composed of many different
things. Technically, you can include anything on the
Web---certain formats will just invoke external programs or
trigger a download. But as far as web pages go, they
traditionally consist of HTML}
\begin{itemize}
\item<+-> HTML---Describes the document
\lecture{which describes the~document, and CSS}
\item<+-> CSS---Describes the document style (appearance)
\lecture{which describes the~document \emph{style}---how it looks,
what font to render in, the background color, et cetera.}
\lecture{Those documents can contain more than just text---there
is support for media as well, like images and embedded
video. Users can submit information by entering data in
form fields. Most of that falls under the HTML spec.}
\item<+-> HTTP---Communication protocol
\lecture{All of this communication is done using the HTTP
protocol, which defines how the server and client
communicate.}
\lecture{Back in the day, most every reaction to user input
involved loading a new webpage. You're seeing less and
less of that today---many web pages look and behave more
like \emph{software} than documents.}
\item<+-> JavaScript---Embed programs in web browser
\lecture{The standard way to do this today is with a language
called JavaScript.}
\end{itemize}
\item<5-> Variety of programs and standard tools can communicate with
webservers and read documents
\lecture{Given these standards for representing documents, styles,
media, etc---you're free to use whatever software you choose!
Everything is interoperable, on both the server and the
client. And this is incredibly important for user freedom,
and for free software.}
\item<6-> Threatened in the past: Java applets, ActiveX, Flash,
Silverlight, and other proprietary/non-standard software
\lecture{That interoperability has been threatened in the past by
other proprietary systems for embedding software in the
browser. The most popular ones include Java applets,
ActiveX, Flash, and Silverlight. Those were dark ages.}
\lecture{We do in fact have another looming threat---the Encrypted
Media Extensions proposal being considered by the W3C which
would effectively introduce DRM as a \emph{standard} for the
Web. We must oppose it, and I encourage you to join us
in protest just across the street tonight at 8:00.}
\item<7-> Now the greatest threat is JavaScript
\lecture{But an \emph{existing} standard is now our greatest
threat. JavaScript.}
\end{itemize}
\end{frame}
\begin{frame}{What is JavaScript?}
\lecture{So what is \emph{JavaScript}?}
\begin{itemize}
\item<2-> ECMAScript (Standard: ECMA-262; ISO/IEC 16262)
\lecture{Formally, it's ECMAScript, which is the standard defining the
language. Browsers tend to incorporate their own
features---some of which are subsequently incorporated into
the spec---so when we refer to ECMAScript, we're talking
about a core standard that all browsers implementing that
particular version should support. There are other
implementations of ECMAScript, like JScript and ActionScript,
but they're used almost exclusively in proprietary
environments, and you should not use them unless you have a
way of running that code on a fully Free operating system.}
\item<3-> Traditionally: Browser-based, client-side scripting language
\lecture{JavaScript started out in the web browser, specifically
Netscape. It was written in 1995 with the goal of offering
something that was easier for non-programmers to write than
Java Applets. The name JavaScript has nothing to do with
Java the language.}
\item<4-> Today: General-purpose programming language
\lecture{But today is has evolved into a popular general-purpose
scripting language, used on both the client and the
server. It's worth noting that JavaScript has been used on
the server for pretty much as long as it has
existed---Netscape used it on the server back in 1995.}
\begin{itemize}
\item<5-> Heavily popularized by Node.js
\lecture{But it wasn't until Node.js that it exploded in
popularity, and is often times even \emph{preferable} by
some to other languages on the server. I'm not getting
into \emph{that} debate today.}
\end{itemize}
\item<6-> ``Assembly language'' of the web
\lecture{It's often called the ``assembly language'' of the web,
because there are dozens of languages that compile into
it---if you want code running in the browser, the standard
way to do it is by using JavaScript.}
\begin{itemize}
\item<7-> Soon: WebAssembly (WebASM)
\lecture{But there are properties of the language that don't make
ideal for being the compiler target for all things on the
web. One popular method is a subset of JavaScript called
asm.js that is more effectively optimized. But now we
have a low-level language on the horizon called
WebAssembly, which is intended as a compiler target for
C/C++ code. So expect these issues I'm about to describe
to only propagate further in the future as it becomes
more and more trivial to write software for the web.}
\end{itemize}
\end{itemize}
\end{frame}
\begin{frame}{The Illusion of Remote Execution}
\lecture{Perhaps one of the greatest dangers of software on the Web is the
illusion of remote execution---}
\begin{itemize}
\item<2-> Looks like the web page is manipulating itself
\begin{itemize}
\item<2-> Many consider the web page as a remote resource, not a local
copy of that resource
\end{itemize}
\lecture{the illusion that, because the program is manipulating and
appears to be a part of the web page, it must be executing
in a magical remote place.}
\item<3-> JavaScript programs run \emph{on the client}
\lecture{But it's not. JavaScript programs are executed \emph{on your
computer, by your web browser}: the program is downloaded
just like any other resource and interpreted by a JavaScript
engine in your browser.}
\item<4-> Illusion inhibits consideration of freedoms
\lecture{This is an important distinction, because we can't begin to
consider how to exercise our four freedoms if we can't even
get around to the fact that the program is actually running
on our computer.}
\end{itemize}
\end{frame}
\begin{frame}[plain]{}
\begin{center}
\center\includegraphics[width=0.9\textwidth]{images/you-win.png}
Would you run some random website's program on your computer?
\end{center}
\lecture{(Read slide)}
\end{frame}
\begin{frame}[plain,c]{}
\lecture{Well, you do.}
\begin{center}
Well, you do.
\end{center}
\lecture{If only our web browser gave us a warning like that. But
instead, it's silent. And this is more dangerous than a phishing
attack---because at least when the user is presented with
\emph{this} (return to previous slide), they have a \emph{chance}
to be suspicious.}
\end{frame}
\begin{frame}{Covert Ephemeral Software}
\begin{itemize}
\item Browser downloads and executes arbitrary, often non-free software
\begin{itemize}
\item (Automatically clicks the download button for you!)
\end{itemize}
\lecture{But no---our web browsers are being stupid on our behalf!}
\item Most users have no idea this is happening
\lecture{And most users---even many technical ones---really don't have
any idea that this is happening. Because they don't think
about it like that.}
\begin{itemize}
\item And if they did, would they know to care?
\lecture{But let's say they did; would they even
\emph{know} to care? You can be taught to be suspicious
of sites advertising awards and such, but when a site
offers no indication at all, then what exactly do you
teach? What do you tell them to be suspicious of?
Instead, it's just a website.}
\item Most who \emph{do} know don't care.
\lecture{But then there are those who are well aware of what is
going on. Many of those are web developers---the same
people that \emph{write} this covert software. And
surprisingly, at least from my experience, most of them
don't care. Many instead take the stance that JavaScript
is an essential component of the modern web and it would
be silly to consider disabling it and quote-unquote
``break'' websites.}
\end{itemize}
\item Ephemeral software
\lecture{And then at the end the software disappears, leaving no
trace except for some persistent data storage. A browser
doesn't list all the scripts that it executes as
``installed software'' like it would an addon. Users won't
know that they were running software.}
\end{itemize}
\end{frame}
\begin{frame}[c]{Just Say ``Yes!''}
\lecture{So if we adopt the philosophy of those who really don't care,
then life becomes a hell of a lot easier. Just saying ``yes''
all the time is much less confrontational; especially when
your web browser is doing it for you. And this makes a lot of
people pretty excited! Like...}
\begin{center}
\only<+>{Advertisers}
\lecture{Advertisers! You say ``yes!'' to their spyware that tracks
and analyzes you.}
\only<+>{Crackers \& Script Kiddies}
\lecture{Crackers and script kiddies love you too. You happily say
``yes!'' to their payloads.}
\only<+>{Governments (also Crackers \& Script Kiddies)}
\lecture{Governments! Also crackers and script kiddies. They like to
broadly distribute exploits in the hope of maybe catching a
criminal. One such exploit was a 0-day used by the FBI to
deanonymize Tor users, guilty or not.}
\only<+>{ISPs (Like Comcast)}
\lecture{And what about the entity you depend on the most for your
communications online? In November of last year it was
discovered that Comcast was MITM'ing customers to inject
JavaScript into non-SSL webpages to inform customers of
copyright violations. Oh yes.}
\only<+>{People who want to show off their cool stuff}
\lecture{There are certainly other malicious actors, but not everyone
has bad intentions---you also have hackers that just want to
show you their cool new programs. And some of those are also
the ones that find it silly to disable JavaScript---how else
would you be able to witness their hard work?}
\end{center}
\end{frame}
\begin{frame}[c]{Just Say ``Yes!''...and ``Yes!'' and ``Yes!'' and ``Yes!''...}
\begin{itemize}
\item<+-> Everyone expects their code to run, always, or there's
something wrong with your browser
\lecture{So if your browser doesn't default to saying ``yes'' to
untrusted, random, freedom-denying, possibly malicious
programs, then your browser is broken. This is in fact a big
deterrent for common-sense freedom and security practices: the
Tor Browser Bundle, for example---although it comes with
NoScript installed---does not block any websites by default,
even though it would make its users safer. No, that would
``break'' websites.}
\item<+-> But most browsers today give you a binary choice:
\lecture{But let's say you are one of those people who might be a
little uncomfortable with this situation, and want to do
something about it. Well, with most browsers, what are your
options?}
\begin{enumerate}[<+->]
\item No---disable JavaScript
\lecture{You could disable JavaScript completely. But there might
be \emph{some} things that you'd like to run.}
\item Yes---run everything!
\lecture{Or you could run everything! Good choices here. These
are clearly not choices that taken into consideration
these issues.}
\end{enumerate}
\lecture{Now, many people will simply say, ``Well, I trust the sites I
visit.''}
\item<+-> You aren't just running that site's JavaScript
\lecture{But it's very important to understand that you aren't just
running the programs for that website. That website might
also include code from other servers---like CDNs. It might
inject other code like the Google Analytics spyware. And
what if the site is compromised, or susceptible to a XSS
attack, and an attacker loads additional scripts?}
\end{itemize}
\end{frame}
\begin{frame}{How Do We Install Software (Usually)?}
\lecture{If all of this seems awkward to consider, that's because it
is. Let's go back to the desktop for a bit; now that we're
thinking in terms of programs running on our computer, how do we
normally install software?}
\begin{itemize}
\item<2-> Explicitly.
\lecture{Explicitly. You indicate that you want some program foo and
you make it so. Unless you use a backdoored operating system
like Windows, OSX, iOS, or others---they tend to install
things for you.}
\begin{itemize}
\item<3-> GNU/Linux---Usually through a package manager
\lecture{On a GNU/Linux operating system, you usually install
software through that distro's package manager. GNU Guix
is a pretty good one to try.}
\item<4-> Source distribution (tarballs/etc)
\lecture{You might compile from source. That's even more of an
explicit process.}
\item<5-> Binaries (especially on proprietary operating systems)
\lecture{And, as is usually necessary on proprietary operating
systems, there are binaries. They might be downloaded from
a website or a walled weed garden,}
\end{itemize}
\item<6-> There is a conscious effort made by the user
\lecture{but it's generally a conscious operation all the same. Even
users of proprietary operating systems don't like when things
appear on their computer without having been requested.}
\end{itemize}
\end{frame}
\begin{frame}{Software Signing}
\lecture{We also have certain other guarantees. Or attempts, at least.}
\begin{itemize}
\item<2-> Any package manager worth using will verify signatures of
package
maintainers
\lecture{If you're using a package manager that doesn't verify a
cryptographic signature of the package, then you should
consider another package manager. Many package managers
provide---with some caveats---assurances that the package you
received is actually the package that the author or
maintainer intended for you to receive. I'm not getting into
those caveats here.}
\item<+-> GNU projects also distribute detached signatures for manual
verification
\lecture{In the case of source distributions, detached signatures are
often used. You'll see this with GNU programs, for
example---if you download a program from ftp.gnu.org, you'll
also find a corresponding signature file, and you should use
GPG to verify that your download is what the author
actually signed.}
%% TODO: either come up with a plan or delete this
\item<+-> No such thing exists for the Web
\lecture{...We don't have this type of thing for the web.}
\item<+-> We need a web of trust (e.g. PGP)---decentralized
\begin{itemize}
\item<+-> What not to do: Firefox refuses to install/run addons that
are not signed by Mozilla
\item<+-> No ``walled gardens''
\end{itemize}
\end{itemize}
\lecture{But what does the absence of user control mean?}
\end{frame}
\begin{frame}[c]
\begin{center}
Everyone is flocking to the web
\end{center}
\lecture{Everyone is flocking to the web. And a major reason is because
of the convenience that is provided by transferring even more
control away from the user to the authors and distributors.}
\end{frame}
\begin{frame}{Effortless Distribution}
\lecture{This convenience provides a distribution model that is
exploitative, and highly alluring to many. Two things that go
great in the same sentence.}
\begin{itemize}[<+->]
\item Software is downloaded \emph{automatically}---guaranteed!
\lecture{So, when you visit a website---as we've already
discussed---your browser just starts saying ``Yes!'' to
software. So, for the majority of your users, it's
essentially guaranteed that your software will be downloaded
and executed, and it will be done so immediately. If not,
their browser is broken, right? Right.}
%% Shackle as a Service
\item It's so easy for you---just click here!
\lecture{Baiting the user into downloading that software is also a
trivial task---there's no trying to trick the user into
downloading and invoking an executable. Just provide the
user with a link, and their freedoms are automatically
robbed.}
\item Cross-\{device,platform\}!
\lecture{In the modern web, platform or operating system isn't a
border---you can rob someone of their freedoms anywhere, any
time, whether they're on a mobile device, their home
computer, or their refrigerator.}
\item Automatic updates! We know best! (Ephemeral software)
\lecture{And let's not worry about those pesky users who decide to
exercise their freedom to decide what software they want to
run. Just overwrite their software for them, at any
time. Updates are automatic, and the user has no
choice.}
\begin{itemize}
\item Your browser is effectively a backdoor
\lecture{You might hear from security experts that most
computers have a backdoor---software updates. Well, in
this case, the backdoor is the front door. You have no
option. There \emph{is no} separate installation and
update---they're one and the same. As I mentioned, we
can say that the software is ephemeral---it exists as
long as you're on the website, and then disappears until
you next load it again.}
\end{itemize}
\item We control your data (SaaSS)!
\lecture{But that's not enough. How can we remove every atom of
freedom that the user has? Ah, let's also hold their data
hostage, and control what they can and cannot do with it!}
\item So easy to spy on you!
\lecture{And what's a magnificent consequence of all of this? We get
to spy on you for free! It's part of the package! We know
exactly what you are doing, when your are doing it, how you
are doing it, and anything in-between. This is too good to
be true!}
\end{itemize}
\end{frame}
\begin{frame}
\begin{center}
\only<1>{We can finally get rid of that pesky little bit of control you
had left over your physical computing!}
\lecture{Greedy, malicious software developers and distributors have
been searching long and hard for ways to prevent users from
even studying the binaries, letalone source code. They've
pursued draconian technical and legal measures like DRM and the
DMCA out of desperation.}
\only<2>{SaaS---Shackles as a Service}
\lecture{But as it happens, the answer fell right into their
laps---``Shackles as a Service''. We're at the point today
where the next step to strip all power from the user is to
remotely render the program and stream images. And
unfortunately, such a thing already exists! It's called
``cloud gaming'', or Gaming as a Service. Hold the fart
jokes. These services remotely render games and stream them
to the user. All user input is sent to the service. The
next logical step after that is then licensing eyeball or
brain implants so that the user can't record or manipulate
the image on her screen! Vision as a Service, perhaps.}
\end{center}
\end{frame}
\begin{frame}{The Web Is Easy}
\lecture{Let's explore another aspect of why the Web is so appealing for
software developers.}
%% TODO: let's emphasize the benefits a bit more
\begin{itemize}[<+->]
\item Low Barrier To Entry
\lecture{Most everyone has a web browser. Everything rendered in that
browser uses standardized document and styling formats---HTML
and CSS---which have been used for decades to represent
documents. This retrofitting of sorts makes it easy to
inspect programs' UIs and play with them. Every modern
browser comes with debugging tools for inspecting the DOM and
running scripts, for monitoring and inspecting network
traffic, for debugging scripts. This is \emph{great} for a
free Web---it encourages studying and tinkering. So
interested users can easily tweak the page, or type some
scripts in the browser's console to see what happens. And
when they start writing software, they can see it in the
familiar environment that is their web browser. There's not
much that is alien to them; if you introduce someone to shell
scripting, C, Perl, Python, etc, they're diving into a world
that is entirely hidden from their perspective as a
\emph{user} of software.}
\item Huge number of libraries and tools for web development
\lecture{Now, the leap from a document format to a program can be a
bit daunting. But, because of all the reasons I mentioned,
the number of libraries focused on web development is growing
at an \emph{unbelievable} rate. You can have working
software running on most every modern operating systems
quickly and easily, and not even have to worry about how
you're going to package and distribute it! And most of these
popular libraries are free software. The most daunting task
for new web developers is often what library to pick.}
\item Even desktop software using web libraries
\lecture{And then we have software like Node.js that allows running
code written for the web directly, without a web browser. So
it often makes sense to write software in JavaScript or a
language that compiles into it, because then you can share
code between the server and client. It makes sense to write
your UI using HTML and CSS, because you can execute the
program in a way that it doesn't look like a website;
Chromium, for example, has a ``app'' mode that makes the
loaded page look like a normal program. And then you have
those that only really know web development, but are now able
to take that knowledge and apply it directly to the server or
the desktop.}
\end{itemize}
\end{frame}
\begin{frame}
\begin{center}
\only<1>{This is great for software freedom.}
\lecture{All of this is great for software freedom---you have all of
these libraries that make it \emph{easy} to develop free
software!}
\only<2>{But we have a problem.}
\lecture{...but we have a problem. Well, another in the \emph{web} of
problems, I suppose.}
\end{center}
\end{frame}
\begin{frame}{Effortless \emph{Proprietary} Software}
\lecture{While it's making software easy for the good guys, it's also
making it easy for the bad guys! And there's an explanation for
that.}
\begin{itemize}[<+->]
\item We have a licensing problem.
\lecture{What we have is a licensing problem! We have a \emph{lot} of
free software,}
\item Permissive licensing \emph{enables} proprietary software
\lecture{but most of it is licensed under a permissive license---the
most popular being the MIT~Expat license, which allows for
non-free derivatives. What this means is that proprietary
software authors have a relatively easy time developing
software that denies users their freedoms. Writing software
is expensive---it takes time, and time is money in
business. Any time that can be saved using these wonderful
free software libraries is money that they can divert toward
adding attractive features, releasing early, and implementing
ways to screw over the user.}
\end{itemize}
\end{frame}
\begin{frame}{Philosophy/Culture Problem}
\lecture{The predominant underlying reason of the licensing problem is a
philosophical and cultural one.}
\begin{itemize}
\item<2-> ``Open source almost everything''---Tom Preston-Werner
\lecture{If you've listened to any in-depth criticism about licensing
practices of the modern web development community, then
you've probably heard of Tom Preston-Werner's post entitled
``Open source almost everything''. It has some startling
statements that illustrate the mindset of the larger web
development community, and the open source community in
general. Let's take a look at a few. Now, just a warning,
some of what you are about to see may shock and confuse
you. Viewer discretion is advised.}
\end{itemize}
\only<3>{
\begin{quote}
\hangleft{``}If you do it right, open sourcing code is \textbf{great
advertising} for you and your company. [...] we like to talk publicly
about libraries and systems we've written that are still closed but
destined to become open source. [...] It helps determine what to open
source [...]. We recently open sourced [...] our chat bot
[...]. Within two days it had 500 watchers on GitHub and 409 upvotes
on Hacker News. This translates into goodwill for GitHub and more
superfans than ever before.'' (Emphasis \emph{not} mine.)
\end{quote}
\lecture{This is an excellent example of why we should reject ``open
source''---as a development methodology, it ignores users' freedoms
entirely. While we're talking about users' freedoms, Tom's talking
about liberating code for advertising and building suspense over a
project to produce ``superfans''. And he determines what to liberate
based on input from that suspense. Not because it's the ethical thing
to do.}
}
\only<4>{
\begin{quote}
\hangleft{``}If your code is popular enough to attract outside
contributions, you will have created a \textbf{force multiplier} that
helps you get more work done faster and cheaper.'' (Emphasis
\emph{not} mine.)
\end{quote}
\lecture{Free labor; that's what Tom sees. They can focus on all the
proprietary goodies that provide business value while the
community writes the rest of the software for them.}
}
\only<5>{
\begin{quote}
\hangleft{``}When you open source useful code, you \textbf{attract
talent}. Every time a talented developer cracks open the code to one
of your projects, you win.'' (Emphasis \emph{not} mine.)
\end{quote}
\lecture{In other words---liberated code is used in a predatory manner
to lure free software hackers into a position of developing
proprietary software.}
}
\only<6>{
\begin{quote}
\hangleft{``}Ok, then what shouldn't I open source? That's
easy. Don't open source anything that represents core business
value.''
\end{quote}
\lecture{But what about the stuff that is truly innovative and valuable
enough that you consider it a core part of your business? The
stuff that you think is the most valuable to you? The stuff
that the free software community needs to compete with this
ever-growing proprietary world? You hide it. And you suggest
that others do the same.}
}
\lecture{Alright, now this last quote blows my mind.}
\only<7>{
\begin{quote}
\hangleft{``}Lastly, \textbf{it's the right thing to do}. It's almost
impossible to do anything these days without directly or indirectly
executing huge amounts of open source code. If you use the internet,
you're using open source. That code represents millions of man-hours
of time that has been spent and then given away so that everyone may
benefit. We all enjoy the benefits of open source software, and I
believe we are all morally obligated to give back to that community.''
(Emphasis \emph{not} mine.)
\end{quote}
}
\lecture{What!? We are all \emph{``morally obligated''}, he says. This
is baffling. He recognizes how much he benefits from the free
software community after talking about how to exploit it and
contribute back only what might benefit their business by
attracting free labor and good talent. To quote Bradley~Kuhn
from one of his talks, this is incredibly self-serving.}
\end{frame}
\begin{frame}{The Web Scene}
\lecture{Tom's philosophy is pervasive throughout the modern web
development community. And if we look at the composition, we can
see why:}
\begin{itemize}
\item<2-5> Contributions by large corporations (e.g. Google, Facebook,
Twitter, GitHub)
%% TODO: Examples
\lecture{It's no question that life today is largely online, and there
are many major corporations that play a big role in
that. Many of the popular free libraries for the web are
written by those corporations and used within their own
proprietary software as well.}
\item<3-5> Startups (e.g. YCombinator-funded)
\lecture{Most new software startups today are going to have some sort
of online component---if even just for the social
aspect. But as has already been discussed, the web is an
attractive platform, and an easy way to create vendor
lock-in---something that many misguided startups will
consider to be a very important thing for their long-term
success. For this to happen---for these young startups to be
able to get software out cheaply and quickly with limited
resources---they need free software. So there is immense
community pressure to create permissively licensed software;
it's more difficult to distribute proprietary software for
the web when the client libraries carry a copyleft.}
\item<4-5> New programmers, new culture
\lecture{And speaking of that community pressure---the web development
community is home to many new or inexperienced
programmers. Those programmers are immersed in a culture that
talks about ``rockstar'' and ``10x'' programmers; about
``brogrammers'' and ``hipster'' languages---these are very
different terms than hackers are used to, and highlight very
different concepts. Importantly, they focus on
\emph{methodology}---performance, producing something that is
cool and will be accepted by your peers. This is not a focus
on freedom at all. ``Copyleft'' is a dirty word: if you want
to be accepted by your peers---\emph{especially} in the
startup community, which you might want to be a part of
yourself---you'd better license your libraries
permissively. If you don't, someone's going to ask you to
relicense so that they can use it in their own proprietary
software, and lecture you on how copyleft restricts their
freedom as a developer. But that's assuming that you've even
been introduced to the concept of copyleft to begin
with. And besides, all your friends are doing it, and
they're all 10x rockstars!}
\item<5> Peer pressure
\lecture{So there is immense peer pressure---pressure to ignore
talking about the awkward politics and philosophy of freedom
entirely and just stick to the brogramming, man.}
\end{itemize}
\end{frame}
\begin{frame}
\begin{center}
Unconscious propagation and consciously manipulative leaders
\lecture{Anti-copyleft activists have the benefit of being able to
focus on the practical arguments---which are easy---and
avoiding or even trying to degrade philosophical
arguments---which are hard, because they involve
confrontation. It's therefore trivial to push ``open
source'' and permissive licensing with the end goal of
fighting copyleft, without actually bringing up the issue
most of the time, thereby creating a large community that
works against copyleft without actually \emph{thinking} about
copyleft. This is very dangerous. As I know many others
here have witnessed when trying to defend copyleft, it can be
very hard to explain these issues to someone who isn't aware
that issues even exist. It's an army of ignorance; an army
of non-enemies that we can't just tear down, because they
might not know better, and we'd do best to try to convince
them that their freedoms are important, and that users'
freedoms are too. And when we go after the leaders---the
mentors---the army swarms to their defense.}
\end{center}
\lecture{Well, having spoken of Bradley Kuhn: as of last month, we even
have a term describing broad issue. And, no, it's not a hipster
word.}
\end{frame}
\begin{frame}
\lecture{Kuhn's paradox!}
\begin{center}
Kuhn's Paradox
\end{center}
\end{frame}
\begin{frame}{Kuhn's Paradox}
\begin{quote}
\hangleft{``}For some time now, this paradoxical principle appears to
hold: each day, more lines of freely licensed code exist than ever
before in human history; yet, it also becomes increasingly more
difficult each day for users to successfully avoid proprietary software
while completing their necessary work on a computer.''
\end{quote}
\lecture{(Read Kuhn's Paradox)}
\lecture{Bradley Kuhn has talked a lot about some of these issues---and I
thank him for doing so. I didn't see his talks
until---coincidentally---after I started preparing \emph{this}
talk, and I was pleasantly surprised to hear him discussing many
of these same issues. I recommend his talks.}
\end{frame}
\begin{frame}{Culture of ``Open Source''}
\begin{itemize}
\item<1-> The licensing problem is a cultural problem
\lecture{This is the culture of ``Open Source''. And this is not
intended as an insult toward that community---it's simply a
truth that the ``Open Source'' movement was created to avoid
talking about freedom.}
\item ``Open Source'' devalues freedom
\lecture{And by avoiding that discussion, it devalues it. If we were
talking about freedom, then these issues get raised and
considered more frequently.}
\begin{itemize}
\item When freedom is inessential, proprietary ``features'' or
derivatives aren't bad
\lecture{So when freedom isn't valued, then these extra
proprietary features or derivatives on top of all the
excellent free software and libraries isn't seen as a bad
thing.}
\item ``Open Core'' (Microsoft)
\lecture{And this model of having a free base with proprietary
extensions is often called ``Open Core'', coined by
Microsoft. We thought ``Open Source'' was dangerous---this
``Open Core'' philosophy not only devlaues freedom, but it
deligitimizes it through some twisted logic!}
\end{itemize}
\item I'll take my Web partially free, hold the free
\lecture{The ``open core'' it describes doesn't exist for freedom---it
exists for the benefits of the ``Open Source'' development
model.}
\end{itemize}
\end{frame}
\begin{frame}[c]
\begin{center}
Partial freedom isn't freedom!
\end{center}
\lecture{But partial freedom isn't freedom! It doesn't matter if
\emph{part} of your software is free---if even a byte of it robs
me of any of my four freedoms, then I can't ethically use it! I
would have to concede that your website is worth surrendering my
freedoms for. It's probably not.}
\end{frame}
\begin{frame}{No Such Thing As Neutral On Freedom}
\begin{itemize}
\item Permissive (pushover) licenses are thought to appease multiple
parties
\lecture{Now remember---''Open Source'' was created to eliminate the
discussion of freedom. Freedom can be an uncomfortable
topic, because it's philosophical. And it's heavily
controversial; some people don't believe in users'
freedoms. Imagine that. This makes for uncomfortable
conversation that most people want to avoid. So they might
try to remain neutral by using pushover licenses, and appease
to every group:}
\begin{itemize}
\item<2-> Free software supporters
\item<3-> Copyleft haters
\item<4-> Businesses
\item<5-> People who really don't know/care
\end{itemize}
\item<6-> But there's no such thing as neutrality!
\lecture{But that is a flawed reasoning. Because when you try to
remain neutral on an important topic, you are remaining
neutral on both the good and the bad. Remaining neutral on
the topic of freedom is like standing on the sidewalk
watching someone being harassed, bullied, beaten. And rather
than step in, you just walk away. Maybe peek back. Because
if you were to step in to stop the bullying, then you'd piss
off the bullies, and you'd be a target. But if you stepped
in and bullied yourself, then you'd be called a bully! So
what's the end result?}
\item<7-> Neutral on freedom $\equiv$ allowing erosion of freedoms
\lecture{You let the bullies take over---they already have the upper
hand, and they'll continue to exert their power as long as it
benefits them.}
\item<8-> Copyleft is \emph{essential} for a free Web
\lecture{Standing up to the bullies means \emph{fighting} for freedom,
not just talking about it. If you are writing software, that
means using copyleft by means of a license like the
AGPL. Otherwise, you're standing on the sidelines watching
every user of the web being bullied.}
\begin{itemize}
\item<9-> If you use pushover licenses, you're helping to push over
everyone else (but perhaps not intentionally)
\lecture{Or worse---if you write a library that uses a pushover
license, then you're not just watching: you're giving
\emph{power} to the bullies. What would they do without
the tools you provide them? Well, they'd have to make
their own. Or maybe they'd see that you demand freedom,
and consider that maybe those they are bullying do
actually deserve some respect.}
\end{itemize}
\end{itemize}
\end{frame}
%% TODO: move to end?
\begin{frame}[c]
\begin{center}
If you value freedom,
\only<1>{talk about Free Software!}%
\only<2>{choose copyleft!}
\lecture{If you value freedom, \emph{talk about free software}!}%
\lecture{If you value freedom, \emph{choose copyleft!} Fight for what
you believe in! Now I understand---peer pressure is a hard
thing to overcome. But we're your peers too.}
\end{center}
\end{frame}
%%%=== BEGIN TIMEBLOCK 6m ==============================================
\begin{frame}[c]
\begin{center}
Freedom is only as good as your ability to exercise it
\end{center}
\lecture{All this focus on copyleft is good and all---if only it were the
solution to all of our problems. But we have a whole Web of
problems to deal with. Freedom is only as good as your ability
to exercise it.}
\end{frame}
\begin{frame}{Maybe free...?}
\begin{itemize}
\item Almost always no license information or link to source code
\lecture{One huge problem we have with software on the web is that it
is almost always void of licensing information. So software
might be free, but we can't be sure of that without having a
JavaScript expert review minified code and try to correlate
it with the original sources. I had to do with with Reddit
when auditing it for the FSF's Free JavaScript
campaign. There's no reasonable expectation for \emph{users}
to do that! They wouldn't be able to!}
\item But is all of it free?
\begin{itemize}
\item Certain things may look free, or have free components
(e.g. the ubiquitous jQuery)
\lecture{But how do we know that a program is fully free? Let's
draw a comparison with traditional binaries. How do you
know it's fully free? Well, you rely in part on
licensing information for the program. If we hold JS to
the same standards, then we at least need licensing
information on distributed code.}
\item Might also load non-free code as a separate program
(e.g. Google Analytics spyware)
\lecture{But the page might load other programs in \emph{addition}
to the free program, for example the Google Analytics
spyware. This is like a free software package installing
proprietary software alongside of it; SourceForge used to
do that, for example.}
\end{itemize}
\end{itemize}
\end{frame}
\begin{frame}{Corresponding Source Code}
\begin{itemize}[<+->]
\item Where can I find the corresponding source?
\lecture{The other requirement is the corresponding source code. We
should be able to build it ourselves, host it ourselves, and
expect to have the same functionality. And we should be able
to audit the distributed code and correlate it with the
original sources. And guess what---I found a small amount of
non-free code missing from the Reddit repository. Very
small, and it just screws with the user by moving elements
around the page if they have some cursed flag set, but
non-free nonetheless.}
\item Minified code is not source code!
\lecture{I have personally had people counter my argument in the past
with a statement saying that all JavaScript code is
quote-unquote ``open source'' because the source code is
distributed to the browser. No!}
\item ``The 'source code' for a work means the preferred form of the
work for making modifications to it. 'Object code' means any
non-source form of a work.''
\lecture{The GPL defines ``source code'' as (read above). So minified
sources are object code. And let's see why:}
\end{itemize}
\end{frame}
\begin{frame}[fragile,plain]
\scriptsize
\begin{verbatim}
add:function(a,b,c,d,e){var
f,g,h,i,j,k,l,m,o,p,q,r=N.get(a);if(r){c.handler&&(f=c,c=f.handler,
e=f.selector),c.guid||(c.guid=n.guid++),(i=r.events)||(i=r.events={}),
(g=r.handle)||(g=r.handle=function(b){return"undefined"!=typeof
n&&n.event.triggered!==b.type?n.event.dispatch.apply(a,arguments):void
0}),b=(b||"").match(G)||[""],j=b.length;while(j--)h=fa.exec(b[j])||[],
o=q=h[1],p=(h[2]||"").split(".").sort(),o&&(l=n.event.special[o]||{},
o=(e?l.delegateType:l.bindType)||o,l=n.event.special[o]||{},k=n.extend(
{type:o,origType:q,data:d,handler:c,guid:c.guid,selector:e,needsContext:
e&&n.expr.match.needsContext.test(e),namespace:p.join(".")},f),(m=i[o])
||(m=i[o]=[],m.delegateCount=0,l.setup&&l.setup.call(a,d,p,g)!==!1||
a.addEventListener&&a.addEventListener(o,g)),l.add&&(l.add.call(a,k),
k.handler.guid||(k.handler.guid=c.guid)),e?m.splice(m.delegateCount++,0,k)
:m.push(k),n.event.global[o]=!0)}}
\end{verbatim}
\lecture{This is a snippet of jQuery's minified sources for an 'add'
method. Real quick---what do each of those arguments mean? What
does this function do?}
\end{frame}
\begin{frame}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics{images/librejs-logo.png}
\end{center}
\lecture{GNU has an addon for Firefox-based browsers like GNU IceCat that
approaches this issue in a few different ways.}
\end{frame}
\begin{frame}{LibreJS}
\begin{itemize}[<+->]
\item Blocks execution of non-free JavaScript
\lecture{LibreJS blocks the execution of non-free JavaScript. But how
does it determine what is non-free?}
\item JavaScript should ideally contain {\tt @license} tags
\lecture{A couple ways. Ideally, the JavaScript should be wrapped in
license tags. It can identify the license in a number of
ways, including the full license header you'd see in source
files, or a magnet link, which is much more ideal for
minified sources.}
\item Hashes of common libraries recognized as free
\lecture{But the Web is full of \emph{existing} software like
libraries that don't contain those labels. So LibreJS also
maintains a list of file hashes for popular libraries. For
example, the minified jQuery file containing the snippet I
showed would be recognized as free, even though it doesn't
contain licensing information.}
\item Web Labels map scripts to corresponding source code
\lecture{It then has a method called Web Labels---which is a simple
HTML table---that is intended to be a machine-readable way to
map scripts to their source code.}
\end{itemize}
\lecture{The LibreJS project needs help from JavaScript developers to
develop and maintain the addon. If you're interested, please
visit gnu.org/software/librejs}.
\end{frame}
\begin{frame}{Submit Patches To Projects!}
\begin{itemize}[<+->]
\item Patch your own projects!
\item Submit patches to add headers to projects
\item Patches for minifiers (e.g. UglifyJS)
\item Patches for programs that combine sources (e.g. Browserify)
\item For Node.js programs: can pull license right out of {\tt package.json}
\end{itemize}
\lecture{You can help by adding licenses to your own projects and by
submitting patches to other projects; this will not only help
solve the licensing issue for that project, but also make others
aware of the issue. And one great way to help is to submit
patches to minifiers like UglifyJS to automatically add that
license information to sources, or retain it if it exists. But
that doesn't help when a minified file might contain code under
various licenses, so it'd also be helpful to patch programs like
Browserify---which packages Node.js modules for the client---to
recognize licenses and add them as appropriate. For node.js
pull the license right out of the package.json file.}
\end{frame}
%%%=== END TIMEBLOCK 6m ==============================================
\begin{frame}{Replacing Programs}
\begin{itemize}
\item<1-> How do you replace a program (free or non-) on your computer?
\lecture{Alright. So back to your desktop for a moment. If you want
to replace a non-free program with a free one, or modify a
free program, how do you do it?}
\begin{itemize}
\item<2-> You just do.
\lecture{Well...you just do.}
\end{itemize}
\item<3-> How do you replace a program (free or non-) on the Web?
\lecture{But what about on the web?}
\end{itemize}
\end{frame}
\begin{frame}[c]
\begin{center}
Ha!
\end{center}
\end{frame}
\begin{frame}{Replacing Programs---The Best Case}
\only<1->{
\begin{enumerate}
\item The program is entirely packaged in its own JavaScript file(s)
\item All dependencies are packaged with or alongside it
\end{enumerate}
}
\lecture{The best situation we have for replacing programs is when the
program is packaged entirely in its own JavaScript files, and
so are its dependencies.}
Solution:
\only<2->{
\begin{enumerate}
\item Block program scripts
\item Block undesirable dependencies
\item Inject replacement program
\end{enumerate}
}
\lecture{The solution isn't all that complicated then. Block those
undesirable scripts from loading and inject a replacement
program. I'll get into how to do that shortly.}
\end{frame}
\begin{frame}{Replacing Programs---The Realistic Case}
\lecture{But if only we were so lucky!}
\begin{enumerate}
\item<1-> The program is actually a number of independent programs
(scripts) doing different things
\lecture{In reality, a web page often contains what can be considered
a bunch of independent programs doing distinct things, like
validating forms, populating a real-time search, a shopping
cart, animating part of the page, etc.}
%% add web page screenshot as an example
\item<2-> Some scripts are packaged in one or more JavaScript files
\lecture{Some of those scripts might be packaged in one or more
JavaScript files. Okay, that's good.}
\item<3-> Some are inline {\tt <script>} tags scattered throughout
\lecture{But some are inline script tags mixed with the HTML.}
%% example
\item<4-> Some are inline JavaScript fragments in HTML attributes
\lecture{And others still might be fragments of JavaScript in HTML
attributes. Not everyone knows how to write proper
JavaScript, and others who do simply don't care that they're
writing a mess of spaghetti code. Or something might be
auto-generating that code for them.}
%% example
\end{enumerate}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{images/code_quality.png}
\end{frame}
\begin{frame}[c]
\begin{center}
\only<1>{Solution?}
\lecture{So what's the solution?}
\only<2>{Write a presentation complaining about it.}
\lecture{Well my first step was to write a rant about it. Because not
everyone thinks about these issues.}
\end{center}
\end{frame}
\begin{frame}{Blocking Scripts---Entirely}
\lecture{One option is to turn of JavaScript in your browser,
entirely. And that feature does exit, hidden within the bowels
of your browser's configuration. But if you disable JavaScript,
then you can't run any replacements.}
\begin{itemize}
\item Can disable JavaScript entirely
\item But then you can't run replacements
\end{itemize}
\end{frame}
\begin{frame}{Blocking Scripts---NoScript}
\begin{itemize}
\item NoScript is effective at blocking scripts per (sub-)domain
\lecture{I consider NoScript to be a necessity for the web. And
consequently, I can't recommend using Chromium or its
proprietary derivative, because it doesn't provide the
necessary APIs to do what NoScript does. And what it does is
block scripts entirely, but allows you to create a whitelist
for specific domains or sub-domains.}
\item Careful---some domains serve lots of scripts (e.g. CDNs)
\lecture{But you have to be careful when you do this, because some
domains serve a lot of different scripts, and some of them
might be non-free. CDNs are popular today.}
\item Some sites require you to trust many different domains
\lecture{It's also not uncommon to see a site referencing scripts from
a dozen different domains. That's a bad practice---you
shouldn't do that, even if only for performance. But do you
really want to trust a dozen third parties to run software
for a single website?}
\end{itemize}
\end{frame}
\begin{frame}{Blocking Scripts---LibreJS}
\begin{itemize}
\item Blocks non-free JS with a high level of granularity
\lecture{LibreJS takes a much more granular approach---it blocks
individual scripts.}
\item Recognizes JavaScript files (or parts of), script tags, inline
scripts in attributes, etc.
\lecture{So rather than domain, it recognizes individual source files,
\emph{sections} of source files if they provide licensing
information, and some of those less desirable practices like
script tags and fragments in HTML attributes.}
\item But doesn't block scripts recognized as free
\lecture{But one feature I'd like to see is the ability to block all
scripts by default, even if free.}
\begin{itemize}
\item So that we can replace specific programs
\lecture{Why? Firstly, we'd be able to replace specific programs
on the page; we can't do that with NoScript.}
\item Free software can do bad things too
\lecture{Free software can still do all the bad things that I
talked about; you just have the ability to remove those
anti-features and replace it. Well, you should, anyway,
if you can find a \emph{way} to replace it.}
\end{itemize}
\item Doesn't play well with NoScript
\lecture{It also doesn't play well with NoScript---even if NoScript
would block scripts on a page, LibreJS will process them. I
don't know how difficult this would be to fix, but ideally it
would so that we can have the benefits of both.}
\end{itemize}
\end{frame}
\begin{frame}{Injecting Scripts---Greasemonkey}
\begin{itemize}
\item Expat / Modified BSD / MPL 1.1
\item Inject user-defined scripts into web pages
\item \url{http://openuserjs.org}, \url{http://greasyfork.org},
\url{http://userscripts-mirror.org}
\end{itemize}
\lecture{After blocking scripts, the second step is replacing
them. Greasemonkey is a popular browser addon for running
arbitrary ``user scripts'' on pages. Since the scripts can be
anything, you can inject your modified program. There are a few
sites hosting scripts written by users that demonstrates the
practical utility of modifying programs on the web, or augmenting
them.}
\end{frame}
\begin{frame}{Injecting Styles---Stylish}
\begin{itemize}
\item GPLv3
\item Inject user-defined CSS into web pages
\item \url{http://userstyles.org}
\end{itemize}
\lecture{When modifying software, you often need to modify the style
associated with certain elements on the page. Or maybe you're
only interested in changing the stylesheet---you can do a lot of
things that way. You can do this with JavaScript, or even inject
CSS with JavaScript, but there's also an addon dedicated to it if
you'd prefer---Stylish. Like greasemonkey, it has a repository
of user-define stylesheets for websites.}
\end{frame}
\begin{frame}{Injecting Scripts/Styles---dotjs}
\begin{itemize}
\item MPL 1.1
\item Inject user-defined scripts from {\tt \~{}/.js}
\item Inject user-defined styles from {\tt \~{}/.css}
\end{itemize}
\lecture{There's also dotjs, which is like a Greasemonkey and Stylish in
one. It takes a much simpler approach---place scripts and
stylesheets for specific domains in your home directory and it
will automatically run them.}
\end{frame}
\begin{frame}{Replacing Scripts---What We Need}
\begin{itemize}
\item<1-> Something your grandparents can use!
\lecture{So that's the existing state of affairs. But as a user---not a
hacker---do you find this intuitive? You can ask your
grandparents to install GNU IceCat on their computer just fine,
but you can't ask them to go through all of this to replace a
non-free program on the web. We need an easier solution.}
\item<2-> Package changes:
\lecture{I challenge someone to create an addon that allows you to:}
\begin{itemize}
\item Install replacement software like you'd install an addon
\item Automatically block scripts with granularity of LibreJS
\item Automatically inject scripts
\item Verify package signatures
\item Update mechanism
\end{itemize}
\item Add support to LibreJS
\lecture{And ideally you'd add that support to GNU LibreJS.}
\end{itemize}
\lecture{But let's be honest.}
\end{frame}
\begin{frame}
\begin{center}
But all this is just a kluge.
\end{center}
\lecture{While all of this would be great, it's ultimately just a
kluge---we're trying to work around an architecture that was not
intended to promote exercising the four freedoms.}
\lecture{So I have a stronger proposal. I'm going to illustrate with an
even more disastrous problem.}
\end{frame}
%% TODO: What to do with "Shackles as a Service" above?
\begin{frame}{Service as a Software Substitute (SaaSS)}
\begin{itemize}
\item<1-> Also called ``Software as a Service'' (SaaS)
\item<1-> ``Who Does That Server Really Serve?'' essay by rms
\lecture{Services as software substitutes. Most people refer to it as
``Software as a Service'', but many of us use the term
``Service as a Software Substitute''---as coined by rms---to
emphasize that you're sacrificing something.}
\item You simply cannot modify a program running on someone else's
server
\lecture{This poses an entirely different problem than software
freedom---you simply cannot modify software on someone else's
computer; nor should you be able to.}
\end{itemize}
\lecture{Now let's be clear---you'll often hear that these services are
hosted quote ``in the cloud''.}
\end{frame}
\begin{frame}[plain]
\begin{center}
There is no cloud.
\end{center}
\end{frame}
\begin{frame}{Desktop vs. Web Application}
\begin{itemize}
\item To regain control, must host it yourself
\item This means running the entire stack (server and client) yourself
\item ``Unweb''
\end{itemize}
\end{frame}
\begin{frame}{Anatomy of a Client-Side Web Application}
\begin{itemize}
\item Cannot unweb proprietary web applications
\item Cannot unweb a partially free stack
\begin{itemize}
\item Webserver
\item Programs/scripts that it runs to generate content
\item Script dependencies
\item Client
\end{itemize}
\end{itemize}
\end{frame}
\begin{frame}{The Affero GPL Doesn't Solve All Problems}
\begin{itemize}
\item Requires that, if users can access a \emph{modified} version of
the program over a network, that they must have access to the
corresponding source code
\item But this only helps a little bit---even if you have the source
code, you can't modify it on the server that's using it
\item The AGPL can be circumvented using a pipeline (where practical)
\item Doesn't cover works that the AGPL'd program might invoke
externally
\end{itemize}
\end{frame}
\begin{frame}[c]
\begin{center}
You depend on the author to make a faithful effort
\end{center}
\end{frame}
\begin{frame}{Plea to Web Developers}
\begin{itemize}
\item Abstract storage and all network calls
\item User-configurable storage and network options
\item Liberate webserver and all server-side programs it runs
\item No non-free server dependencies (linked or not)
\item Sane configuration defaults and examples!
\end{itemize}
\end{frame}
\begin{frame}
\begin{center}
\only<1>{Web application works just as desktop program}
\only<2>{End Goal: Just Run {\tt ./foo}}
\end{center}
\end{frame}
\begin{frame}
\begin{center}
Mike Gerwitz
{\url mtg@gnu.org}
\medskip
Interested in submitting your project to GNU?
{\url gnueval@gnu.org}
\medskip
Licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution ShareAlike 4.0
International License
\end{center}
\end{frame}
%% real-world examples
%% free software can do bad things too
\closeout\lecturenotes
\end{document}