January 19, 2026
My last post touched on the prevalence of open source software (OSS) and posed the question: Who is your vendor? I discussed how explicit license terms enable collaboration. Now let’s consider the consequences of decades of collaboration.
OSS is the foundation upon which countless software products and services are built. From an IP perspective, tracking which OSS you use (and don’t use) is important relative to IP litigation risk. This tracking is common in corporate environments, but also is commonly passive and lacks detail because more may not be required with permissive OSS licenses.
In a dynamic context of millions of instances of OSS intertwined within your business, the overall quality of your products and services is deeply intertwined with the quality of the OSS upon which you depend. Staying abreast of the latest enhancements and bug fixes in all of that dynamic OSS requires a detailed inventory.
For years the Software Bill of Materials or “SBOM” has been a much maligned artifact of software development. Many will argue they are problem ridden: SBOMs are full of errors, are output in competing formats, aren’t requested by customers, and are ultimately useless because nobody does anything with them. This is incorrect
At a minimum, as an engineering leader it is useful to know what is in your own software. You must have visibility on well known security bugs for example before your customers, regulators, and insurers, who naturally might complain to you if there is a dire quality lapse.
Well ahead of a customer asking for your SBOM, your business itself should be asking for them from itself and analyzing the results.
I regularly find notable gaps in companies' engineering practices showing up as visible gaps in company SBOMs. Do you have surprises in your SBOMs? Reach out for a conversation…