>From Paul G. Allen on Wednesday, 01 August, 2001:
>To take another angle, those of us who actively look for exploits in software (because companies like M$ fail to do so themselves) risk being sued for doing so.
Hrm. Very good point. However, under most EULA's I've seen, reverse
engineering is already a no-no.
>This makes jobs like mine EXTREMELY difficult because on the one hand I don't want my company using software that will allow Joe Cracker to take over our
>machines, and on the other I don't want the company sued just because I did some necessary reverse engineering in order to prevent it (again, because the
>software mfg. can't be trusted to do it themselves).
I don't see why it makes your job any harder. Sounds like a very
good argument for Open Source and/or Free Software. :)
-Joseph
-- Joseph==============================================jap3003@ksu.edu "IBM were providing source code in the 1960's under similar terms. VMS source code was available under limited licenses to customers from the beginning. Microsoft are catching up with 1960." --Alan Cox, http://www2.usermagnet.com/cox/index.html - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Aug 07 2001 - 21:00:29 EST