{
  "id": "RL31627",
  "type": "CRS Report",
  "typeId": "REPORTS",
  "number": "RL31627",
  "active": false,
  "source": "EveryCRSReport.com",
  "versions": [
    {
      "source": "EveryCRSReport.com",
      "id": 101424,
      "date": "2003-12-17",
      "retrieved": "2016-04-08T14:32:11.357544",
      "title": "Computer Software and Open Source Issues: A Primer",
      "summary": "The use of open source software by the federal government has been gaining attention as\norganizations continue to search for opportunities to enhance their information technology (IT)\noperations while containing costs. For the federal government and Congress, the debate over the use\nof open source software intersects several other issues, including, but not limited to, the development\nof homeland security and e-government initiatives, improving government information technology\nmanagement practices, strengthening computer security, and protecting intellectual property rights. \nCurrently, the debate over open source software often revolves primarily around information security\nand intellectual property rights. However, issues related to cost and quality are often raised as well. \n   Open source  software refers to a computer program whose source code, or\n programming\ninstructions, is made available to the general public to be improved or modified as the user wishes. \nSome examples of open source software include the Linux operating system and Apache Web server\nsoftware. In contrast,  closed source , or proprietary, programs are those whose source\ncode is not\nmade available and can only be altered by the software manufacturer. In the case of closed source\nsoftware, updates to a program are usually distributed in the form of a patch or as a new version of\nthe program that the user can install but not alter. Some examples of closed source software include\nMicrosoft Word and Corel WordPerfect. The majority of software products most commonly used,\nsuch as operating systems, word processing programs, and databases, are closed source programs. \n \n  For proponents, open source software is often viewed as a means to reduce an organization's\ndependence on the software products of a few companies while possibly improving the security and\nstability of one's computing infrastructure. For critics, open source software is often viewed as a\nthreat to intellectual property rights with unproven cost and quality benefits. So far there appear to\nbe no systematic analyses available that have conclusively compared closed source to open source\nsoftware on the issue of security. In practice, computer security is highly dependent on how an\napplication is configured, maintained, and monitored. Similarly, the costs of implementing an open\nsource solution are dependent upon factors such as the cost of acquiring the hardware/software,\ninvestments in training for IT personnel and end users, maintenance and support costs, and the\nresources required to convert data and applications to work in the new computing environment. \nConsequently, some computer experts suggest that it is not possible to conclude that either open\nsource or closed source software is inherently more secure or more cost efficient.\n  At this time there appears to be no centralized accounting of open source software throughout\nthe federal government. However, the growing emphasis on improved information security and\ncritical infrastructure protection overall, will likely be an influential factor in future decisions to\nimplement open source solutions. The rapidly changing computer environment may also foster the\nuse of a combination of open source and closed source applications, rather than creating a need to\nchoose one option at the exclusion of another. This report will be updated as events warrant.",
      "type": "CRS Report",
      "typeId": "REPORTS",
      "active": false,
      "formats": [
        {
          "format": "PDF",
          "encoding": null,
          "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/pdf/RL31627",
          "sha1": "3059353302ea567581bf7c57ea9144e8eec50cdd",
          "filename": "files/20031217_RL31627_3059353302ea567581bf7c57ea9144e8eec50cdd.pdf",
          "images": null
        },
        {
          "format": "HTML",
          "filename": "files/20031217_RL31627_3059353302ea567581bf7c57ea9144e8eec50cdd.html"
        }
      ],
      "topics": []
    }
  ],
  "topics": [
    "Science and Technology Policy"
  ]
}