I broke it down from a security or auditing angle for all sides here:<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.schneier.com&#x2F;blog&#x2F;archives&#x2F;2014&#x2F;05&#x2F;friday_squid_bl_424.html#c6051639" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.schneier.com&#x2F;blog&#x2F;archives&#x2F;2014&#x2F;05&#x2F;friday_squid_...</a><p>Review was fundamental. It would be costly and take talent. So, like you, I proposed something that was open source but not quite free. Not many in OSS want to discuss proprietary OSS options but I think it&#x27;s a critical conversation as it could get better stuff on the market. Prior conversations here at least showed the term, open source, was highly loaded with the expectation of free distribution due to its history. So, I&#x27;ll modify the essay and next discussion to use shared source.<p>Elaborated more on my concept for a hybrid here:<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=10500298" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=10500298</a>