bugtraq - Re: Microsoft and Security

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date: Mon, 12 Jul 2004 07:47:27 -0400
From: Charles Otstot <charles.otstot@...ail.net>
To: Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu
Cc: Alun Jones <alun@...is.com>, bugtraq@...urityfocus.com
Subject: Re: Microsoft and Security

Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu wrote:

>On Mon, 05 Jul 2004 16:10:36 PDT, Alun Jones <alun@...is.com>  said:
>  
>
><snip>
>
>Proof that Microsoft still needs to re-educate some high-level people: the
>fact that there was *any* thought given to making SP2 only install on
>"legal" copies and locking out pirated copies.  The number of people running
>pirated copies that actually will buy legit ones just to install SP2 is quite
>likely tiny - but the number of people running pirated ones that would end
>up remaining insecure is much larger.  This one *should* have been a no-brainer:
>
><snip>
>

I won't argue the rest of your points, however, this one I would 
consider invalid. Here, I have to agree with Microsoft's original 
concept. Those with pirated copies have no claim to, nor a right to, any 
fixes (security or otherwise) from Microsoft.  While an argument could 
be made that not permitting these people to have fixes could endanger 
innocent users and others with legal copies, this is at best a morally 
ambiguous and thin argument. The simple fact is, those who use pirated 
software (be it Microsoft's or anyone else's), are simply thieves who do 
not deserve to reap any benefits from their actions.

Charlie