If this is actually a test that licenses must pass to be considered DFSG, how exactly does the GPL survive the test? Section 2, clause a of the GPL reads,"You must cause the modified files to carry prominent notices stating that you changed the files and the date of any change." Doesn't this violate the Dissident test and cause troubles for our poor totalitarian state citizen?
No because while the changes need to be revealed, they need only to be revealed to those who the poor citizen distributes it to. The othher dissidents know it is modified, but they won't care. perhaps i sould have included the entire text of the test:
"""Consider a dissident in a totalitarian state who wishes to share a modified bit of software with fellow dissidents, but does not wish to reveal the identity of the modifier, or directly reveal the modifications themselves, or even possession of the program, to the government. Any requirement for sending source modifications to anyone other than the recipient of the modified binary---in fact any forced distribution at all, beyond giving source to those who receive a copy of the binary---would put the dissident in danger. For Debian to consider software free it must not require any such excess distribution.
"""The tests are not official but if they are failed it seems wrong to call the package free. Remember that the the G is DFSG is 'Guidelines'. Even if the package meets the guidelines it may contain clauses that prevent the package from being free. For example if a licence requires you to sing loudly and/or stand on your head while distributing the software, (assuming that those examples do not somehow the guidelines) it would clearly be non-free. And debian would be unable to distribute it.