FSF Sysadmin: Ensuring Software Freedom & The BigBlueButton Story

The Free Software Foundation (FSF), a central advocate for software freedom, operates a surprisingly complex technical infrastructure. Behind the public face of advocacy and community building lies a dedicated tech team – currently just two people, including its president, Ian Kelling – responsible for maintaining sixty-three different services, platforms, and websites. This function isn’t simply about keeping the lights on; it’s about embodying the FSF’s core values in practice, ensuring that every tool used by the organization, and by extension, the wider free software community, aligns with the principles of user control and software freedom.

Kelling, who was elected FSF president in October 2025, balancing this role with his duties as senior systems administrator, emphasizes that this commitment to freedom isn’t a theoretical exercise. It’s fundamental to the FSF’s ability to function. Hosting conferences, scheduling meetings, and processing financial transactions all depend on having access to truly free software. As Techrights noted, Kelling’s appointment signals a move towards “young faces” within the FSF leadership, bringing a hands-on technical perspective to the organization’s direction.

The Challenge of Defining “Free” Software

Identifying and vetting software for freedom isn’t a simple task. With hundreds of thousands of programs available, the FSF tech team relies on a multi-layered approach. Their first port of call is often the package repository of a free as in freedom GNU/Linux distribution, currently Trisquel. Using commands like apt-cache search, they can quickly scan tens of thousands of packages, benefiting from the rigorous review process already undertaken by the distribution’s developers. The Free Software Directory, a project run by the FSF itself, provides another valuable resource for verified free software. When these sources don’t yield results, the team turns to search engines and Wikipedia, but with increased scrutiny.

This process isn’t merely about checking a box. It requires a deep understanding of software licenses and a willingness to dig beyond surface-level claims. The FSF maintains a list of licenses, evaluating their compatibility with free software principles. But, as Kelling points out, the proliferation of different licenses creates a significant challenge for both users and developers.

A Recent Licensing Battle: BigBlueButton and MongoDB

The complexities of software licensing were recently highlighted by an issue with BigBlueButton, a videoconferencing platform used by the FSF. In versions 2.3 and 2.4, BigBlueButton unintentionally adopted a nonfree license change from MongoDB, a database system it relied upon. The FSF identified this issue in late 2020 and alerted the BigBlueButton team. While forks of the earlier, free version of MongoDB existed, no one stepped forward to maintain it. This presented a dilemma for users like the FSF: continue using outdated software or switch to a different solution.

Rather than accept this outcome, the FSF decided to actively contribute to a solution. They investigated alternative databases and ultimately identified FerretDB as a promising MongoDB alternative. The team assisted FerretDB developers in adapting the software to work with BigBlueButton. These efforts culminated in the release of BigBlueButton 3.0 in 2025, which is now entirely free software. This case demonstrates the FSF’s commitment to not just identifying nonfree software, but actively working to replace it with free alternatives, particularly in areas crucial to the free software ecosystem, like educational tools.

Tools of the Trade: ScanCode and License Checking

The process of verifying software freedom often requires detailed technical analysis. Kelling describes using tools like ScanCode and npx license-checker to examine the licenses of software dependencies, particularly within complex projects like BigBlueButton. He recently spent approximately four hours re-reviewing BigBlueButton’s licensing, analyzing hundreds of NodeJS JavaScript dependencies. This highlights the significant time and effort required to ensure software freedom, even for seemingly straightforward applications.

Navigating Ambiguous Licensing Terms

The FSF also cautions against blindly trusting license claims. Some licenses may superficially resemble copyleft licenses – those that require derivative works to also be free – but lack the necessary provisions to qualify. For example, the Reciprocal Public License, while appearing similar to copyleft, includes restrictions that render it nonfree, such as requiring the publication of modified versions even for private leverage. The FSF advises users to consult their license list and remain skeptical of claims that a license is copyleft without verification.

As Kelling notes, the FSF tech team is small – just two people – and relies heavily on contributions from the community. Their work is essential for maintaining the integrity of the free software ecosystem and ensuring that the values of software freedom are translated into practical reality.

Supporting the FSF’s work is a direct investment in the future of free software. Becoming an associate member, currently $12 USD per month for individuals ($6 for students), provides financial support and access to membership benefits. The FSF is currently striving to reach a goal of 100 new associate members and, as Kelling emphasizes, every contribution makes a difference.

The ongoing effort to maintain and promote free software requires constant vigilance and a commitment to technical rigor. The FSF, through its tech team and broader community, plays a vital role in ensuring that software remains a tool for empowerment and user control, rather than a source of restriction and dependency.

Yours in freedom,
Ian Kelling
President and senior systems administrator