Re: [VulnWatch] Details of Sybase ASE bugs withheld

From: Peter J. Holzer (hjp_at_wsr.ac.at)
Date: 03/23/05

  • Next message: liquid_at_cyberspace.org: "Re: Possible windows+python bug" 
    Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 10:00:56 +0100
To: bugtraq@securityfocus.com

    On 2005-03-22 15:38:51 -0500, sean wrote:
    > Another question, how can one prove that it was found by disassembling the code?

    In the EU, reverse engineering is explicitely allowed if it is done to
    ensure interoperability. (Is an exploit an interoperable program? :-))

    > What if it were found by brute force testing? I can't imagine that a company
    > would prohibit the user from testing the functionality of a product they sell?

    Oracle prohibits their users from publishing performance benchmarks.
    (Not from doing benchmarks, mind you, just from publishing the results)

    > A friend of mine told me this sort of legal piracy was commonplace -
    > have there ever been any actual legal proceedings in a similar
    > situation?

    It is generally believed (at least here in Europe) that quite a lot of
    the clauses in a typical licence are against the law and couldn't be
    upheld before court. Companies probably hope that their customers will
    comply anyway, either because they don't know their rights or because
    they cannot afford a lengthy law suit (even if they have good chances of
    winning).

            hp 

    -- 
   _  | Peter J. Holzer \Beta means "we're down to fixing misspelled comments in
|_|_) | Sysadmin WSR     \the source, and you might run into a memory leak if 
| |   | hjp@wsr.ac.at     \you enable embedded haskell as a loadable module and
__/   | http://www.hjp.at/ \write your plugins upside-down in lisp". --ae@op5.se

  • Next message: liquid_at_cyberspace.org: "Re: Possible windows+python bug"
    • Quantcast