On Fri, 2005-12-02 at 14:08 +0000, Rui Miguel Silva Seabra wrote: > On Fri, 2005-12-02 at 15:06 +0100, Simo Sorce wrote: > > On Fri, 2005-12-02 at 09:58 +0000, Rui Miguel Silva Seabra wrote: > > > On Fri, 2005-12-02 at 08:13 +0000, Sam Liddicott wrote: > > > > Well I propose that software includes calls to validation scripts to > > > > implement such measures, and that such scripts be specifiable by > > > > environment variables in order to upgrade such scripts to provide the > > > > er.. latest enforcement that is avilable. > > > > > > > > That would meet the requirements of the law? Which seemed to suggest > > > > that ir was lack of control that was objectionable. > > > > > > Can you modify the variable to use a script that always returns true? > > > Yes. > > > > > > Then that strategy is likely illegal under that law. > > > > You can do the same with proprietary, closed source, software. > > Have you ever heard of disassemblers and binary patches ? > > I know that, you know that, and anyone with two fingers of forehead > knows that. > > But some don't have the foggiest idea and think that that is OK.
Then our duty is to make that basic information available and to let people know that even hardware keys never stops someone willing to infringe and that making source code unlawful is just stupid and unnecessary. Simo. -- Simo Sorce - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Xsec s.r.l. - http://www.xsec.it via Garofalo, 39 - 20133 - Milano mobile: +39 329 328 7702 tel. +39 02 2953 4143 - fax: +39 02 700 442 399 _______________________________________________ Discussion mailing list [email protected] https://mail.fsfeurope.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion
