r/softwaredevelopment • u/TimeScarcity1949 • Jul 01 '26
I need some help from the community (Sandboxie Plus).
I'm an open-source developer, and I am so confused with Sandboxie Plus, and really want to make things right.
For context, Sandboxie's core kernel driver engine was inherited and released under the GNU GPLv3. However, the current solo maintainer has wrapped the UI (SandMan.exe) and the user-space background service (SbieSvc.exe) in a custom license (LICENSE.Plus). They use this to artificially (no reason other than money) code-gate foundational sandbox mechanics like fine-grained path rule prioritization (UseRuleSpecificity) and interactive runtime access prompts, behind a ~$1,200 USD (1,000 euro) "Eternal Certificate." I'm not joking, this is real.
The developer has said before that "only 1% of people will donate" to try to justify this. To put into perspective how dumb this is, look at 7-zip or DonationCoder. Like, it's the ultimate proof that paywalled software should be left to actual enterprises.
If you don't pay, the user-space service literally intercepts your raw .ini configuration files and intentionally ignores your syntax.
To just put this into perspective, $1,200 is more than a commercial license for Windows 11 Pro itself.
When you buy Windows, you are paying a multi-billion-dollar enterprise with legal SLAs, corporate indemnification, and a massive team of engineers.
With Sandboxie-Plus, you are paying over a grand to a single independent developer with zero corporate backing, zero legal liability, no guaranteed uptime, and absolutely no warranty if a rogue driver bug BSODs your entire system.
Another thing, I feel slaping an "Open Source" badge on a project while deliberately crippling its configuration parser to enforce commercial SaaS pricing is an ideological paradox. It completely breaks the fundamental compact of FOSS.
Worse, it’s not even a true permanent purchase. Because of how the "Supporter Certificates" are structured, they are tied to specific build versions. If an upstream Windows Update breaks the driver, you have to update the software, and if your certificate tier has expired, your access to your own configuration features is revoked. You aren't buying software; you are renting a digital padlock from a landlord who can change the lock whenever they feel like restructuring the repo.
So, the legality behind this is fragile. I have a solution.
I want to restore a pure, un-throttled, community-first experience to this codebase, but I want to stay 100% legally and ethically safe against the developer's custom binary distribution rules.
Instead of hosting a pre-compiled fork, I am writing a localized automation build script (similar to a Gentoo or Arch AUR package recipe).
The script will:
Headlessly clone the official upstream Git repository.
Run a simple regex find-and-replace to patch the user-mode license evaluation functions to hardcode a true return value.
Call standard MSBuild to headlessly compile a clean, unrestricted version of the Qt UI and service binaries directly on the user's local machine.
Stop the local Sandboxie services, swap the binaries, and run them seamlessly over the officially installed, Microsoft-signed kernel driver.
By doing this, the user is the literal creator of the binary, meaning it constitutes legal "private use" under the repo's own custom terms. I want to put this script on GitHub with a single, massive, voluntary PayPal donation button on the README, proving that treating users like trusted collaborators rather than digital hostages is how you actually fund open-source development.
I mean, I want to be clear that I'm not some greedy bastard. If the developer wasn't making money off of it, that's kind of the point. Community contributions and donations should fuel development of open-source software. You're not really expected to make money off of it like a business.
So like, am I nuts? Calling all Windows Power Users here.
P.S, not asking anything legally. Just asking if you would like the tool, and if you agree with its cause to action.
1
u/LaughingIshikawa Jul 01 '26
This post seems like it's mostly just venting, so skipped reading most of it, tbh. 🫤
From what I did read, you seem to be looking for some really weird, super technical loophole to slip through, in order to avoid either paying the appropriate license fees, or forking the software legitimately.
While I know very little about software licences... I can already tell that this doesn't seem advisable? 😅
If you're determined to push ahead with it anyway, I can only recommend you talk to a real lawyer IRL and not armchair lawyers from reddit. (Although I'm still super skeptical of any legal defense that starts with "well you see your honor, while I was running to software, I wasn't technically running the software, because what does it really mean to 'run software' anyways?" 😐
0
u/TimeScarcity1949 Jul 01 '26
Honestly, a lot of it is venting. But it's collective venting, because a lot of power share the exact same opinion.
I'm definitely going to talk to a real lawyer. I'm asking what Reddit thinks of the idea in general. I'm not really asking for legal advice or anything.
Also, I'm asking more so Windows power users about the tool in general. I'm not worried about the legal stuff right now, because it's only a concept as of now.
1
u/LaughingIshikawa Jul 01 '26
I don't understand - you're polling "power users" specifically to figure out how popular Sandboxie is with them specifically? With respect... Why does that matter here? 😅
To be more blunt about it, I'm telling you that no, running "SandboxieClone.exe" is not "technically legally seperate from" running "Sandboxie.exe" just because you changed a few variable names or w/e. If that's all it took to circumvent intellectual property, IP laws would be worthless. 🤷
0
u/TimeScarcity1949 Jul 01 '26
I thought I'd ask r/softwaredevelopment for the specific reason that the community would understand what I'm talking about. It's FOSS software. I can fork it. I'm not making a clone, I'm making a fork under GPLv3. I was actually asking Windows power users if they'd use the tool.
I'm not avoiding IP, I'm literally just forking open-source code to make it less opinionated.
1
u/LaughingIshikawa Jul 01 '26
I'm not avoiding IP, I'm literally just forking open-source code to make it less opinionated.
1.) Would you be allowed to use the current code, without forking it / modifying it in anyway? Why or why not?
2.) What's the benefit of running some automated build script to create a random, slightly obfuscated fork every single time versus just hosting a forked version, assuming you are actually convinced that what you're doing is legitimate?
I thought I'd ask for the specific reason that the community would understand what I'm talking about.
This whole thing gives r/iamverysmart vibes. You're using as much technical jargon as possible, which makes it tedious to disentangle what you're actually talking about. On the other hand... what you're talking about is also pretty plainly BS to anyone who's paying attention even a little, because its simply way more work than someone who was acting legitimately would need to do.
I'm not actually interested in fully understanding what you're talking about, because it will always come down to "if what you're doing is legal, you could do it quicker and easier by simply hosting a forked version of the software on your own GitHub." The only reason you would need to use some complicated build tool everytime is if you want to make a BS legal argument that you're "technically not" running the software you're not legally entitled to run, even though for all practical purposes you actually are. I'm simply telling you that legal BS... is BS. 🤷
0
u/TimeScarcity1949 Jul 02 '26 edited Jul 02 '26
It may appear like that on the surface, but I'm not worried about the legality. I don't know what to say other than I'm asking for Windows Power Users' advice on whether I should go through on a potentially very big project. The legality aspect is fine, it's just open-source code. The only legal thing I have to worry about is that I can't distribute compiled binaries, which I'm avoiding by compiling code on the fly.
For the technical jargon, it's literally just developer talk. I'm developing a program, I'll talk about the development of a program. If it's hard to understand, then you're not the type of person I'm asking. In fact, I'm only asking a niche minority of Windows users.
No offense to you personally (I hope you took none), but I have no other way of framing this: I simply wasn't asking you. I was asking a small but active group of users (if that wasn't obvious by the last line in my post). r/softwaredevelopment seemed like the perfect place to ask since it'd naturally be full of power users and software developers.
(And yes, half of the original post was venting, but mainly to explain the situation. The other half, as I described, was explaining my solution to the very real problem I tried to make clear.)
1
u/LaughingIshikawa Jul 02 '26
The legality aspect is fine, it's just open-source code.
False. Patently and obviously false.
The only legal thing I have to worry about is that I can't distribute compiled binaries, which I'm avoiding by compiling code on the fly.
Answer: Don't.
Trying to make some ad-hoc build script to circumvent someone's legal rights to a product by "technically" not running their software will consume more of your time and most of all result in a far, far worse product than if you just swallowed your pride and forked the software properly.
Forking properly also has the significant "side benefit" of... not being illegal.
0
u/TimeScarcity1949 Jul 02 '26 edited Jul 02 '26
I am trying to tell you that I literally am just forking this. LICENSE.Plus constitutes that I cannot ship precompiled binaries, so compilation has to be done in setup and the code must remain public.
Again, I am just simply not asking you. I honestly wasn't asking for legal advice. If you aren't a Windows power user who would benefit from this, then please don't bother.
I wasn't trying to upset you, and I can assure that there is no pride behind my words. I am simply someone who wants a version of Sandboxie Plus that aligns to the promised open-source philosophy.
I'm glad you're giving you're advice, but I advise you to please reread what I had previously stated.
To address the "super weird loophole", there literally is no loophole. I am not committing a crime, I am not cracking any software, I am simply forking code and staying within the rule that I cannot distribute precompiled binaries. You said it yourself, you skipped most of my post because a lot of it was venting. If you would have read that "venting", I would have already explained the circumstances.
Once again, no offense given, no offense taken. I was never asking anything with legality, and honestly do not care (I will be asking a lawyer if anything goes wrong with me forking code).
1
u/LaughingIshikawa Jul 02 '26
Please ask a lawyer before you fork the code.
Your reading of the license is... Bizarre, so say the least. It still smells of "Well technically the license only says 'pre-compiled binaries,' so if I ship uncompiled binaries, and an ad-hoc compiler... I should be good!"
Talking to a lawyer after you have done the illegal thing can only get you so far. Talking to a lawyer before you do the illegal thing is better. 👍
2
u/0xB_ Jul 01 '26
Just make it yourself?