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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20110330154257.42395gk0mazbxsw0@jabea.net> Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2011 15:42:57 -0400 From: jabea@...ea.net To: Cal Leeming <cal@...whisper.co.uk> Cc: full-disclosure@...ts.grok.org.uk Subject: Re: INSECT Pro 2.5 Release - Web scanner tool Quoting Cal Leeming <cal@...whisper.co.uk>: > What this really comes down to... Is the product *worth* donating to? If it > is, then donate. If it isn't, then don't. I can't personally comment either > way as I haven't tried it. > I agree with you, but in order to test it you *must* donate. First time I see that. Unless you email the authors, or are a FD's subcriber and have used Steven's mirror. (pre 2.5 was tagged free, now it's tagged "There is no fixed price to get a copy"). I just mean, make a real licensing behind the tool if you want to sell it, or use a open licensing, but don't play with word in between. Playing the donation way can be complex, if a user want a receipt for their donation, can they produce it ? (I don't know USA law, but where I live only a official non-profit organisation can receive a 'donation'. Else it's simply considered a money gift). Their site advertise donation as 10, 50 and 100$, again, where I live you have the obligation to produce receipt for donation over 10$. But my point is simply they just don't look professionnal, and I judge them that way because they try to sell the product, not like a GPL source code or a freeware. -phil _______________________________________________ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists