RE: Re[2]: [Full-Disclosure] pissed off

From: Steve Wray (steve.wray_at_paradise.net.nz)
Date: 04/27/03

  • Next message: Melvyn Sopacua: "RE: Re[2]: [Full-Disclosure] pissed off"
    To: "'J G'" <sixsigma98@hotmail.com>, <full-disclosure@netsys.com>
    Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2003 09:47:15 +1200
    

    And the fact that software companies can get away with
    claiming to have no liability for the fitness of their products
    means that they can continue to produce and sell and make millions
    out of their defective products.

    From the Unix Haters Handbook;

    <quote>
    Real standards ... are for physical objects like steel beams: they let
    designers order a part and incorporate it into their design with
    foreknowledge of how it will perform under real-world conditions.
    "If a beam fails in service, then the builder's lawyers call the beam
    maker's lawyers to discuss things like compensatory and punitive
    damages."
    Apparently, the threat of liability keeps most companies honest; those
    who aren't honest presumably get shut down soon enough.
    <end quote>

    Somehow an entire industry has arisen with no concept of liability
    and, therefore, with no concept of honesty.

    No honesty *at* *all*

    > -----Original Message-----
    > From: full-disclosure-admin@lists.netsys.com
    > [mailto:full-disclosure-admin@lists.netsys.com] On Behalf Of J G
    > Sent: Monday, 28 April 2003 8:23 a.m.
    > To: full-disclosure@netsys.com
    > Subject: Re: Re[2]: [Full-Disclosure] pissed off
    >
    >
    > No, no, no. Read the End User License Agreement. Every one I
    > have read says
    > the vulnerabilities belong to the licensee (user) of the
    > software, never the
    > people that put them there.
    >
    > Ray
    >
    > >I thought vulnerabilities belonged to people who were
    > writing vulnerable
    > >softwares...
    >
    >
    > _________________________________________________________________
    > Tired of spam? Get advanced junk mail protection with MSN 8.
    > http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
    >
    > _______________________________________________
    > Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
    > Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html
    >

    _______________________________________________
    Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
    Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html


  • Next message: Melvyn Sopacua: "RE: Re[2]: [Full-Disclosure] pissed off"

    Relevant Pages

    • RE: Re[2]: [Full-Disclosure] pissed off
      ... SW>>> And the fact that software companies can get away with ... the threat of liability keeps most companies honest; ... SW>>> who aren't honest presumably get shut down soon enough. ...
      (Full-Disclosure)
    • Re: Commercial Copy Protection SDK?
      ... >>keep the honest people honest. ... held in a licence key file. ... A crack can circumvent this, ... spanners into the works and work out your liability. ...
      (comp.security.misc)
    • Re: Commercial Copy Protection SDK?
      ... >>keep the honest people honest. ... held in a licence key file. ... A crack can circumvent this, ... spanners into the works and work out your liability. ...
      (comp.security.misc)