MetaMask wallet is not open source

[Aspie96]

MetaMask is listed as open source, but it no longer is (nor was it when #6696 was opened). The source code of the browser extention is available, but the license is not open source.

The wallets page uses the phrase "open source", not "source available", and it also uses the OSI logo as a symbol, so this should be fixed.

[vj-codes]

@lukassim hey can I work on this?

[samajammin]

Hey @Aspie96 - thanks for raising this!

Agree with you that while MM source code is publicly available, it's not open source.

Rather than setting MM's open_source to false, I suggest the approach we take here is to re-work the open_source wallet data field from a boolean to enum with 3 options, e.g.:

• open source
• source available
• closed source

I think it's worth differentiating source available vs. closed source. There's still tremendous value for users & developers to be able to inspect & audit the source code of a wallet vs. something that is completely closed source.

I welcome input on this idea from the community! cc @corwintines

[corwintines]

I agree with the enum solution to this. I still think having source code available sets MM apart from closed source.

@Aspie96 and community, would also like to hear what you think.

[Aspie96]

Sorry for my late reply.

I agree with the enum!

Because open source software is also source available, the filter should have 3 modes:

• No filter
• Source available (also includes OSS).
• Only OSS.

[github-actions[bot]]

This issue is stale because it has been open 45 days with no activity.

[uday03meh]

Hi @samajammin, I would like to work on this issue. Please assign it to me.

[github-actions[bot]]

This issue is stale because it has been open 45 days with no activity.

[GHkrishna]

Hello guys, Do we have an update on this issue? If possible I can start working on the issue by changing the data type for the flag and allowing the three values suggested by @samajammin.

I think changing this property can also affect other flow. For eg. Sorting on the basis of opensource on the wallet page

I would argue to rather keep the flag as it is and add another parameter giving more info about the code visibility. Please suggest.

[wackerow]

Circling back, this does about to be an issue still.

I went ahead and assigned @corwintines as we're currently in the midst of some changes to the wallet page. @corwintines please feel free to re-assign as you see fit, but if you could help take a look at our options here given the existing structure that would be appreciated!

[wackerow]

Took a quick look at this... we're in the middle of revamping the wallet's page, so this won't have progress until after that is completed to avoid scope creep on that task.

We're using booleans for all of these features / filter options right now, which would require a little reworking to get a non-binary option in here... We can easily assign values to this such as `open_source: "OPEN" | "AVAILABLE" | "CLOSED", but we don't have a clean way to parse through these options with the current setup.

@nloureiro Maybe we can chat about this at some point in the near future... ideally we have a separate indicator for wallets that have their source available, but not free to fork/use (different from the open source icon). These features are currently filtered using toggles, which work great for a boolean option, but less so for an "enum" style choice. How we'd go about having a "three-way-toggle" of some kinda can be discussed.

[corwintines]

Based on discussion with the team, we would like to do the following:

• Maintain the functionality of the toggle. If something is source available or open source, it will be shown when the open source filter is applied
• We add a new category source available for wallets. They can now be open source, closed source, or source available
• Change metamask to source available
• Add tooltip with information on what source available means

[github-actions[bot]]

This issue is stale because it has been open 30 days with no activity.