[Macha]

> Is this not open source?

The OSI, FSF and DFSG would all agree that this is not open source if it imposes field of use restrictions.

> What’s a palatable license if you want to be able to sell a hosted version of your product?

The old approach here was to do open core, where the core software is open source but enterprisey wants like SAML/OIDC, auditing features, etc. were in a seperate edition. This generally doesn't get the same hostility as this type of license, where only old (and insecure versions) are available for open source usage.

Or just accept that what you want _isn't_ open source, and go for source-available with a freeware edition. Just don't expect to have your cake and eat it with the publicity and profile boost of open source and the exclusive commercialization ability of proprietary software.