> > Viksit Gaur wrote: > > Hmm.. > > > > Just some thoughts.. > > Suppose my company (i dont work for any, btw :) has > > spent a million bucks in developing and promoting a > > technology, would I like it if someone was to develop > > something which circumvents my security measures and > > possibly eat into or even trivialize my profits? > > Suppose you have a million bucks to spend you might want to put that > money into developing a security scheme which is not so trival to break. > Plus The hacker is doing you a favor by breaking your scheme and > showing possible flaws in your software, If as a company you decide > to look at it as a "flaw." Hey, Viksit - some more thoughts ... What if instead of a million bucks I was workin on my own, ekeing out an existence, and i spent valuable time developing a software (in say an interpreted language) , which has a quick-dirty lock for my evaluation copy. First of all, if you tell everyone how to break my lock, you are NOT doing me a favor - you are harming me. Second, if instead of adding domain specific features, i spend my time writing a more and more sophisticate algo (while you spend your spare time breaking it), then it is a big unproductive waste of my time. Are all software developers (individuals) expected to be developing complex crypto locks and protection.
In our meeting it was discussed that there is a difference in facilitating something wrong, and actually doing wrong (like having 2 hands and actually strangling someone). But what if the tool (no pun) was developed specifically to enable others to do something harmful ? And it was even put up free of cost for all with instructions on how to do harm? Then does it matter if the creator actually did himself do harm ? Its much like its a crime to possess /sell narcotics even if you dont consume, whereas it may not be a crime to possess a gun (which can arguably be used for self defense). > It also did occur to me that Cross-Over and WINE etc are specifically made to run MS's products which could hurt MS's sales of its OS. At this moment, i think the original creator (MS) should have the first say in whether someone is allowed to use his product with other products for which it was not intended to be used. No one asked me to buy MSOffice and then cry that it doesnt run on Linux ! Same for iTunes, You knew when you bought it where it could run. _______________________________________________ ilugd mailinglist -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd Archives at: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.user-groups.linux.delhi http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
