full-disclosure - Re: Cisco's stolen code

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]

From: x30n at digrev.org (x30n@...rev.org)
Subject: Re: Cisco's stolen code

> > STATEMENT: "There's no way around it."
> > 
> > RESPONSE: I beg to differ. No disrespect intended, but given the mission
> statement for the Full Disclosure mailing list, the use of the "stolen code"
> clearly falls under the "FAIR USE" exemption of copyright law. Having said
> that, there may be criminal and civil liability issues involved in
> possessing, transfering or receiving said code, but it is manifestly not a
> violation of copyright law.
> > 
> 
> 
> With all due respect...Fair Use does not cover stolen works !
> 
>

   I may be wrong, but it seems that according to the second part of Section 
107 part 4 "The fact that a work is unpublished shall not itself bar a finding 
of fair use if such finding is made upon consideration of all the above 
factors." This implies that although there might be other criminal and or civil 
charges (Such as recieving stolen property), associated with obtaining such 
stolen code, the posession and even auditing and public criticism of such a 
work wouldn't necessarily be deemed copyright infringement.
Clarification from someone with more of a legal background would be nice.

--
     x30n

www.digrev.org

> 
> -- 
> James H. Edwards
> Routing and Security Administrator
> At the Santa Fe Office: Internet at Cyber Mesa  
> jamesh@...ermesa.com
> noc@...ermesa.com
>