<!--#include virtual="/server/header.html" --> <!-- Parent-Version: 1.96 --> <!-- This page is derived from /server/standards/boilerplate.html --> <!--#set var="TAGS" value="essays cultural ns" --> <!--#set var="DISABLE_TOP_ADDENDUM" value="yes" --> <title>Who Does That Server Really Serve? - GNU Project - Free SoftwareFoundation (FSF)</title>Foundation</title> <!--#include virtual="/philosophy/po/who-does-that-server-really-serve.translist" --> <!--#include virtual="/server/banner.html" --> <!--#includevirtual="/philosophy/po/who-does-that-server-really-serve.translist"virtual="/philosophy/ph-breadcrumb.html" --> <!--GNUN: OUT-OF-DATE NOTICE--> <!--#include virtual="/server/top-addendum.html" --> <div class="article reduced-width"> <h2>Who does that server really serve?</h2><p>by <strong>Richard Stallman</strong></p> <p>(First published by <a href="http://bostonreview.net/BR35.2/stallman.php"> Boston Review</a>.)</p> <p><strong>On<address class="byline">by Richard Stallman</address> <div class="introduction"> <p><em>On the Internet, proprietary software isn't the only way to lose your computing freedom.SoftwareService as aServiceSoftware Substitute, or SaaSS, is another way toletgive someone elsehavepower over yourcomputing.</strong></p>computing.</em></p> </div> <p>The basic point is, you can have control over a program someone else wrote (if it's free), but you can never have control over a service someone else runs, so never use a service where in principle running a program would do.</p> <p>SaaSS means using a service implemented by someone else as a substitute for running your copy of a program. The term is ours; articles and ads won't use it, and they won't tell you whether a service is SaaSS. Instead they will probably use the vague and distracting term “cloud,” which lumps SaaSS together with various other practices, some abusive and some ok. With the explanation and examples in this page, you can tell whether a service is SaaSS.</p> <h3>Background: How Proprietary Software Takes Away Your Freedom</h3> <p>Digital technology can give you freedom; it can also take your freedom away. The first threat to our control over our computing came from <em>proprietary software</em>: software that the users cannot control because the owner (a company such as Apple or Microsoft) controls it. The owner often takes advantage of this unjust power by inserting malicious features such as spyware, back doors, and <ahref="http://DefectiveByDesign.org">Digitalhref="https://www.defectivebydesign.org">Digital Restrictions Management (DRM)</a> (referred to as “Digital Rights Management” in their propaganda).</p> <p>Our solution to this problem is developing <em>free software</em> and rejecting proprietary software. Free software means that you, as a user, have four essential freedoms: (0) to run the program as you wish, (1) to study and change the source code so it does what you wish, (2) to redistribute exact copies, and (3) to redistribute copies of your modified versions. (See the <a href="/philosophy/free-sw.html">free software definition</a>.)</p> <p>With free software, we, the users, take back control of our computing. Proprietary software still exists, but we can exclude it from our lives and many of us have done so. However, we are nowface a new threatoffered another tempting way toourcede control over our computing:SoftwareService as aService.Software Substitute (SaaSS). For our freedom's sake, we have to reject that too.</p> <h3>HowSoftwareService as aServiceSoftware Substitute Takes Away Your Freedom</h3><p>Software<p>Service as aService (SaaS)Software Substitute (SaaSS) means using a service as a substitute for running your copy of a program. Concretely, it means that someone sets up a network server that does certain computingtasks—running spreadsheets, word processing,activities—for instance, modifying a photo, translating text into another language, etc.—then invites users todo their computing onlet thatserver. Usersserver do <em>their own computing</em> for them. As a user of the server, you would sendtheiryour data to the server, which doestheirthat computing activity on the data thus provided, then sends the results back to you or else acts directly onthem directly.</p> <p>Theseyour behalf.</p> <p>What does it mean to say that a given computing activity is <em>your own</em>? It means that no one else is inherently involved in it. To clarify the meaning of “inherently involved,” we present a thought experiment. Suppose that any free software you might need for the job is available to you, and whatever data you might need, as well as computers of whatever speed, functionality and capacity might be required. Could you do this particular computing activity entirely within those computers, not communicating with anyone else's computers?</p> <p>If you could, then the activity is <em>entirely your own</em>. For your freedom's sake, you deserve to control it. If you do it by running free software, you do control it. However, doing it via someone else's service would give that someone else control over your computing activity. We call that scenario SaaSS, and we say it is unjust.</p> <p>By contrast, if for fundamental reasons you couldn't possibly do that activity in your own computers, then the activity isn't entirely your own, so the issue of SaaSS is not applicable to that activity. In general, these activities involve communication with others.</p> <p>SaaSS servers wrest control from the users even more inexorably than proprietary software. With proprietary software, users typically get an executable file but not the source code. That makes it hardfor programmersto study the code that is running, so it's hard to determine what the program really does, and hard to change it.</p> <p>WithSaaS,SaaSS, the users do not have even the executablefile:file that does their computing: it is onthesomeone else's server, where the users can't see or touch it. Thus it is impossible for them to ascertain what it really does, and impossible to change it.</p> <p>Furthermore,SaaSSaaSS automatically leads toharmfulconsequences equivalent to the malicious features of certain proprietarysoftware.software.</p> <p> For instance, some proprietary programs are “spyware”: the program <a href="/philosophy/proprietary-surveillance.html"> sends out data about users' computingactivities.activities</a>. Microsoft Windows sends information about users' activities to Microsoft. Windows Media Playerand RealPlayer reportreports what each user watches or listensto.</p>to. The Amazon Kindle reports which pages of which books the user looks at, and when. Angry Birds reports the user's geolocation history.</p> <p>Unlike proprietary software,SaaSSaaSS does not require covert code to obtain the user's data. Instead, users must send their data to the server in order to use it. This has the same effect as spyware: the server operator gets thedata. He gets it withdata—with no special effort, by the nature ofSaaS.</p>SaaSS. Amy Webb, who intended never to post any photos of her daughter, made the mistake of using SaaSS (Instagram) to edit photos of her. Eventually <a href="https://slate.com/technology/2013/09/privacy-facebook-kids-dont-post-photos-of-your-kids-on-social-media.html"> they leaked from there</a>.</p> <p>Theoretically, homomorphic encryption might some day advance to the point where future SaaSS services might be constructed to be unable to understand some of the data that users send them. Such services <em>could</em> be set up not to snoop on users; this does not mean they <em>will</em> do no snooping. Also, snooping is only one among the secondary injustices of SaaSS.</p> <p>Some proprietaryprograms can mistreat users under remote command.operating systems have a universal back door, permitting someone to remotely install software changes. For instance, Windows has a universal back door with which Microsoft can forcibly change any software on the machine.The Amazon Kindle e-book reader (whose name suggests it's intended to burn people's books) has an OrwellianNearly all portable phones have them, too. Some proprietary applications also have universal backdoor that Amazon used in 2009 to <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/18/technology/companies/18amazon.html" >remotely delete</a> Kindle copies of Orwell's books <cite>1984</cite> and <cite>Animal Farm</cite> whichdoors; for instance, theusers had purchased from Amazon.</p> <p>SaaS inherently givesSteam client for GNU/Linux allows the developer to remotely install modified versions.</p> <p>With SaaSS, the server operatorthe power tocan change the software inuse, oruse on theusers' data being operated on. Once again, no special code is neededserver. He ought to be able to dothis.</p>this, since it's his computer; but the result is the same as using a proprietary application program with a universal back door: someone has the power to silently impose changes in how the user's computing gets done.</p> <p>Thus,SaaSSaaSS is equivalent tototalrunning proprietary software with spyware and agaping wideuniversal backdoor, anddoor. It gives the server operator unjust power over theuser. We can't accept that.</p> <h3>Untanglinguser, and that power is something we must resist.</p> <h3>SaaSS and SaaS</h3> <p>Originally we referred to this problematical practice as “SaaS,” which stands for “Software as a Service.” It's a commonly used term for setting up software on a server rather than offering copies of it to users, and we thought it described precisely the cases where this problem occurs.</p> <p>Subsequently we became aware that the term SaaS is sometimes used for communication services—activities for which this issue is not applicable. In addition, the term “Software as a Service” doesn't explain <em>why</em> the practice is bad. So we coined the term “Service as a Software Substitute,” which defines the bad practice more clearly and says what is bad about it.</p> <h3>Untangling the SaaSS Issue from the Proprietary Software Issue</h3><p>SaaS<p>SaaSS and proprietary software lead to similar harmful results, but thecausalmechanisms are different. With proprietary software, thecausemechanism is that you have and use a copy which is difficultorand/or illegal to change. WithSaaS,SaaSS, thecausemechanism is that youuse a copy youdon'thave.</p>have the copy that's doing your computing.</p> <p>These two issues are often confused, and not only by accident. Web developers use the vague term “web application” to lump the server software together with programs run on your machine in your browser. Some web pages installnontrivial ornontrivial, even large JavaScript programstemporarilyinto your browser without informing you. <a href="/philosophy/javascript-trap.html">When these JavaScript programs are nonfree</a>, theyare as badcause the same sort of injustice as any other nonfree software. Here, however, we are concerned with theproblemissue of using theserver softwareservice itself.</p> <p>Many free software supporters assume that the problem ofSaaSSaaSS will be solved by developing free software for servers. For the server operator's sake, the programs on the server had better be free; if they are proprietary, theirownersdevelopers/owners have power over the server. That's unfair to the server operator, and doesn't helpyouthe server's users at all. But if the programs on the server are free, that doesn't protectyou <em>as the<em>the server'suser</em>users</em> from the effects ofSaaS. They give freedom toSaaSS. These programs liberate the server operator, but notto you.</p>the server's users.</p> <p>Releasing the server software source code does benefit the community: it enables suitably skilled userscanto set up similar servers, perhaps changing the software.But<a href="/licenses/license-recommendations.html"> We recommend using the GNU Affero GPL</a> as the license for programs often used on servers.</p> <p>But none of these servers would give you control over computing you do on it, unless it's <em>your</em>server. The rest wouldserver (one whose software load you control, regardless of whether the machine is your property). It may be OK to trust your friend's server for some jobs, just as you might let your friend maintain the software on your own computer. Outside of that, all these servers would beSaaS. SaaSSaaSS for you. SaaSS always subjects you to the power of the server operator, and the only remedy is, <em>Don't useSaaS!</em>SaaSS!</em> Don't use someone else's server to do your own computing on data provided by you.</p> <p>This issue demonstrates the depth of the difference between “open” and “free.” Source code that is open source <a href="/philosophy/free-open-overlap.html">is, nearly always, free</a>. However, the idea of an <a href="https://opendefinition.org/ossd/">“open software” service</a>, meaning one whose server software is open source and/or free, fails to address the issue of SaaSS.</p> <p>Services are fundamentally different from programs, and the ethical issues that services raise are fundamentally different from the issues that programs raise. To avoid confusion, we <a href="/philosophy/network-services-arent-free-or-nonfree.html"> avoid describing a service as “free” or “proprietary.”</a></p> <h3>DistinguishingSaaSSaaSS from Other Network Services</h3><p>Does avoiding SaaS mean<p>Which online services are SaaSS? The clearest example is a translation service, which translates (say) English text into Spanish text. Translating a text for yourefuseis computing that is purely yours. You could do it by running a program on your own computer, if only you had the right program. (To be ethical, that program should be free.) The translation service substitutes for that program, so it is Service as a Software Substitute, or SaaSS. Since it denies you control over your computing, it does you wrong.</p> <p>Another clear example is using a service such as Flickr or Instagram to modify a photo. Modifying photos is an activity that people have done in their own computers for decades; doing it in a server you don't control, rather than your own computer, is SaaSS.</p> <p>Rejecting SaaSS does not mean refusing to use any network servers run by anyone other thanyou? Not at all.you. Most serversdoare notraise this issue,SaaSS because thejob youjobs they dowith them isn't yourare some sort of communication, rather than the user's owncomputing except in a trivial sense.</p>computing.</p> <p>The originalpurposeidea of web servers wasn't to do computing for you, it was to publish information for you to access. Even today this is what most web sites do, and it doesn't pose theSaaSSaaSS problem, because accessing someone's published information isn'ta matter ofdoing your own computing. Neither ispublishing your own materials viause of a blog site to publish your own works, or using a microblogging service such as Twitter oridenti.ca.StatusNet. (These services may or may not have other problems, depending on details.) The same goes for other communication not meant to be private, such as chatgroups. Socialgroups.</p> <p>In its essence, social networkingcan extend into SaaS; however, at root itisjustamethodform of communication and publication, notSaaS. If you use theSaaSS. However, a service whose main facility is social networking can have features or extensions which are SaaSS.</p> <p>If a servicefor minor editing of what you're going to communicate, thatis not SaaSS, that does not mean it is OK. There are other ethical issues about services. For instance, Facebook requires running nonfree JavaScript code, and it gives users asignificant issue.</p>misleading impression of privacy while luring them into baring their lives to Facebook. Those are important issues, different from the SaaSS issue. </p> <p>Services such as search engines collect data from around the web and let you examine it. Looking through their collection of data isn't your own computing in the usual sense—you didn't provide that collection—so using such a service to search the web is notSaaS. (However,SaaSS. However, using someone else'ssearch engineserver to implement a search facility for your own site <em>is</em>SaaS.)</p> <p>E-commerceSaaSS.</p> <p>Purchasing online is notSaaS,SaaSS, because the computing isn'tsolely yours;<em>your own</em> activity; rather, it is done jointly by and for you andanother party. So there's no particular reason why you alone should expect to control that computing.the store. The real issue ine-commerceonline shopping is whether you trust the other party with your money and other personalinformation.</p>information (starting with your name).</p> <p>Repository sites such as Savannah and SourceForge are not inherently SaaSS, because a repository's job is publication of data supplied to it.</p> <p>Using a joint project's servers isn'tSaaSSaaSS because the computing you do in this way isn'tyours personally.your own. For instance, if you edit pages on Wikipedia, you are not doing your own computing; rather, you are collaborating in Wikipedia'scomputing.</p> <p>Wikipediacomputing. Wikipedia controls its own servers, butgroups can faceorganizations as well as individuals encounter the problem ofSaaSSaaSS if they do theirgroup activities on someone else's server. Fortunately, development hosting sites such as Savannah and SourceForge don't pose the SaaS problem, because what groups do there is mainly publication and public communication, rather than their own private computing.</p> <p>Multiplayer games are a group activity carried out oncomputing in someone else'sserver, which makes them SaaS. But where the data involved is just the state of play and the score, the worst wrong the operator might commit is favoritism. You might well ignore that risk, since it seems unlikely and very little is at stake. On the other hand, when the game becomes more than just a game, the issue changes.</p> <p>Which online services are SaaS? Google Docs is a clear example. Its basic activity is editing, and Google encourages people to use it for their own editing; this is SaaS. It offers the added feature of collaborative editing, but adding participants doesn't alter the fact that editing on the server is SaaS. (In addition, Google Docs is unacceptable because it installs a large nonfree JavaScript program into the users' browsers.) If using a service for communication or collaboration requires doing substantial parts of your own computing with it too, that computing is SaaS even if the communication is not.</p>server.</p> <p>Some sites offer multiple services, and if one is notSaaS,SaaSS, another may beSaaS.SaaSS. For instance, the main service of Facebook is social networking, and that is notSaaS;SaaSS; however, it supports third-party applications, some of whichmay be SaaS.are SaaSS. Flickr's main service is distributing photos, which is notSaaS,SaaSS, but it also has features for editing photos, which isSaaS.</p> <p>Some sites whose main serviceSaaSS. Likewise, using Instagram to post a photo ispublication and communication extendnot SaaSS, but using itwith “contact management”: keeping trackto transform the photo is SaaSS.</p> <p>Google Docs shows how complex the evaluation of a single service can become. It invites peopleyou have relationships with. Sending mailtothose peopleedit a document by running a large <a href="/philosophy/javascript-trap.html">nonfree JavaScript program</a>, clearly wrong. However, it offers an API foryouuploading and downloading documents in standard formats. A free software editor can do so through this API. This usage scenario is notSaaS, but keeping track ofSaaSS, because it uses Google Docs as a mere repository. Showing all yourdealings with them, if substantial,data to a company is bad, but that isSaaS.</p> <p>Ifa matter of privacy, not SaaSS; depending on a service for access to your data isnot SaaS,bad, but thatdoes not mean itisOK. There are other bad thingsa matter of risk, not SaaSS. On the other hand, using the servicecan do. For instance, Facebook distributes videofor converting document formats <em>is</em> SaaSS, because it's something you could have done by running a suitable program (free, one hopes) inFlash,your own computer.</p> <p>Using Google Docs through a free editor is rare, of course. Most often, people use it through the nonfree JavaScript program, whichpressures users to runis bad like any nonfreesoftware,program. This scenario might involve SaaSS, too; that depends on what part of the editing is done in the JavaScript program and what part in the server. We don't know, but since SaaSS and proprietary software do similar wrong to the user, itgives users a misleading impression of privacy. Those are important issues too,is not crucial to know.</p> <p>Publishing via someone else's repository does not raise privacy issues, butthis article's concernpublishing through Google Docs has a special problem: it is impossible even to <em>view theissuetext</em> ofSaaS.</p>a Google Docs document in a browser without running the nonfree JavaScript code. Thus, you should not use Google Docs to publish anything—but the reason is not a matter of SaaSS.</p> <p>The IT industry discourages users fromconsideringmaking these distinctions. That's what the buzzword “cloud computing” is for. This term is so nebulous that it could refer to almost any use of the Internet. It includesSaaS and it includes nearly everything else.SaaSS as well as many other network usage practices. In any given context, an author who writes “cloud” (if a technical person) probably has a specific meaning in mind, but usually does not explain that in other articles the term has other specific meanings. The termonly lends itselfleads people touselessly broad statements.</p> <p>The real meaning ofgeneralize about practices they ought to consider individually.</p> <p>If “cloud computing” has a meaning, it isto suggestnot a way of doing computing, but rather a way of thinking about computing: a devil-may-care approachtowards your computing. Itwhich says, “Don't askquestions, just trust every business without hesitation.questions. Don't worry about who controls your computing or who holds your data. Don't check for a hook hidden inside our service before you swallowit.”it. Trust companies without hesitation.” In other words,“Think like“Be a sucker.”I preferA cloud in the mind is an obstacle to clear thinking. For the sake of clear thinking about computing, let's avoid theterm.</p>term “cloud.”</p> <h3 id="renting">Renting a Server Distinguished from SaaSS</h3> <p>If you rent a server (real or virtual), whose software load you have control over, that's not SaaSS. In SaaSS, someone else decides what software runs on the server and therefore controls the computing it does for you. In the case where you install the software on the server, you control what computing it does for you. Thus, the rented server is virtually your computer. For this issue, it counts as yours.</p> <p>The <em>data</em> on the rented remote server is less secure than if you had the server at home, but that is a separate issue from SaaSS.</p> <p>This kind of server rental is sometimes called “IaaS,” but that term fits into a conceptual structure that downplays the issues that we consider important.</p> <h3>Dealing with theSaaSSaaSS Problem</h3> <p>Only a small fraction of all web sites doSaaS;SaaSS; most don't raise the issue. But what should we do about the ones that raise it?</p> <p>For the simple case, where you are doing your own computing on data in your own hands, the solution is simple: use your own copy of a free software application. Do your text editing with your copy of a free text editor such as GNU Emacs or a free word processor. Do your photo editing with your copy of free software such asGIMP.</p> <p>But whatGIMP. What if there is no free program available? A proprietary program or SaaSS would take away your freedom, so you shouldn't use those. You can contribute your time or your money to development of a free replacement.</p> <p>What about collaborating with otherindividuals?individuals as a group? It may be hard to do this at present without using a server, and your group may not know how to run its own server. If you useone,someone else's server, at least don't trust a server run by a company. A mere contract as a customer is no protection unless you could detect a breach and could really sue, and the company probably writes its contracts to permit a broad range of abuses.PoliceThe state can subpoena your data from the company along withless basis than requiredeveryone else's, as Obama has done tosubpoena them from you,phone companies, supposing the company doesn't volunteer them like the US phone companies that illegally wiretapped their customers for Bush. If you must use a server, use a server whose operators give you a basis for trust beyond a mere commercial relationship.</p> <p>However, on a longer time scale, we can create alternatives to using servers. For instance, we can create a peer-to-peer program through which collaborators can share data encrypted. The free software community should develop distributed peer-to-peer replacements for important “webapplications”.applications.” It may be wise to release them under the <a href="/licenses/why-affero-gpl.html"> GNU Affero GPL</a>, since they are likely candidates for being converted into server-based programs by someone else. The <a href="/">GNU project</a> is looking for volunteers to work on such replacements. We also invite other free software projects to consider this issue in their design.</p> <p>In the meantime, if a company invites you to use its server to do your own computing tasks, don't yield; don't useSaaS.SaaSS. Don't buy or install “thinclients”,clients,” which are simply computers so weak they make you do the real work on a server, unless you're going to use them with <em>your</em> server. Use a real computer and keep your data there. Do yourworkown computing with your own copy of a free program, for your freedom's sake.</p> <div class="announcement comment" role="complementary"> <p>See also: <a href="/philosophy/bug-nobody-allowed-to-understand.html">The Bug Nobody is Allowed to Understand</a>.</p> </div> <div class="infobox extra" role="complementary"> <hr /> <p>The first version of this article was published in the <cite><a href="https://bostonreview.net/articles/richard-stallman-free-software-drm/"> Boston Review</a></cite>.</p> </div> </div> </div><!-- for id="content", starts in the include above --> <!--#include virtual="/server/footer.html" --> <divid="footer"> <p> Pleaseid="footer" role="contentinfo"> <div class="unprintable"> <p>Please send general FSF & GNU inquiries to <a href="mailto:gnu@gnu.org"><gnu@gnu.org></a>. There are also <a href="/contact/">other ways to contact</a> the FSF.<br /> Please send brokenBroken links and other corrections or suggestions can be sent to <ahref="mailto:webmasters@gnu.org"><webmasters@gnu.org></a>. </p> <p>Pleasehref="mailto:webmasters@gnu.org"><webmasters@gnu.org></a>.</p> <p><!-- TRANSLATORS: Ignore the original text in this paragraph, replace it with the translation of these two: We work hard and do our best to provide accurate, good quality translations. However, we are not exempt from imperfection. Please send your comments and general suggestions in this regard to <a href="mailto:web-translators@gnu.org"> <web-translators@gnu.org></a>.</p> <p>For information on coordinating and contributing translations of our web pages, see <a href="/server/standards/README.translations.html">Translations README</a>. --> Please see the <a href="/server/standards/README.translations.html">Translations README</a> for information on coordinating andsubmittingcontributing translations of this article.</p> </div> <!-- Regarding copyright, in general, standalone pages (as opposed to files generated as part of manuals) on the GNU web server should be under CC BY-ND 4.0. Please do NOT change or remove this without talking with the webmasters or licensing team first. Please make sure the copyright date is consistent with the document. For web pages, it is ok to list just the latest year the document was modified, or published. If you wish to list earlier years, that is ok too. Either "2001, 2002, 2003" or "2001-2003" are ok for specifying years, as long as each year in the range is in fact a copyrightable year, i.e., a year in which the document was published (including being publicly visible on the web or in a revision control system). There is more detail about copyright years in the GNU Maintainers Information document, www.gnu.org/prep/maintain. --> <p>Copyright ©20102010, 2013, 2015, 2016, 2018, 2020, 2021, 2022 RichardStallman <br /> ThisStallman</p> <p>This page is licensed under a <a rel="license"href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/3.0/us/">Creativehref="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/">Creative CommonsAttribution-NoDerivs 3.0 United States License</a>. </p> <p>Updated:Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License</a>.</p> <!--#include virtual="/server/bottom-notes.html" --> <p class="unprintable">Updated: <!-- timestamp start --> $Date: 2022/01/01 17:34:46 $ <!-- timestamp end --> </p> </div></div></div><!-- for class="inner", starts in the banner include --> </body> </html>