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: <1304008077.2239.9.camel@hp> Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2011 19:27:57 +0300 From: Tõnu Samuel <tonu@....ee> To: corpus.defero@...et.com Cc: full-disclosure@...ts.grok.org.uk Subject: Re: Barracuda backdoor On Thu, 2011-04-28 at 17:05 +0100, corpus.defero wrote: > On Thu, 2011-04-28 at 08:29 -0700, ichib0d crane wrote: > (snipped) > > but that doesn't > > change the fact that Barracuda has done something likely bad here. A > > vendor should make it explicitly clear when they have the capability > > to disable remote products that have already been purchased. Maybe > > their ToS allows it, maybe not. Either way it is highly unethical. > > > They can't. All they can do is disable updating of the virus and spam > definitions. It will still work without a subscription to 'energize > updates'. Reread topic again. This is exactly what they did - they disabled essentially needed features of customer property, unrelated to annual subscription. Also this is less important in my opinion but actually all bills were paid which removes even last options to make customer guilty here. I would really be angry is BMW remotely disables my car because they have some civil disagreement with local service center for example. Tõnu _______________________________________________ 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