full-disclosure - Re: New open source Security Framework

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: Thu, 6 Oct 2011 16:10:02 +0200
From: Christian Sciberras <uuf6429@...il.com>
To: Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu
Cc: full-disclosure@...ts.grok.org.uk
Subject: Re: New open source Security Framework

I'd expect someone with the brain size of a pea would at least rename
variables in the code he claimed as his...
Someone with more sense would probably write such a 50-liner from scratch...





On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 4:01 PM, <Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu> wrote:

> On Thu, 06 Oct 2011 00:34:00 -0300, root said:
>
> > You don't have the faintest idea of how licencing works. You cannot slap
> > a GPL v3 license to any software you see, much less erase the author's
> > names. If you find a code in the internet without any license, you
> > pretty much can't touch it, and must re-implement it completely.
>
> In particular, if code was written in a country that's a signatory to the
> Berne
> conventions, it's usually somewhere between very difficult and impossible
> to
> actually place a software work in the public domain - at least under US
> law,
> even putting an explicit "This work is hereby placed in the public domain"
> quite likely does *NOT* suffice - the only two clear ways to public domain
> in
> the US are expiration of the "lifetime of the author plus 75 years"
> copyright,
> and "works for hire by a US federal government employee as part of his
> duties"
> (so, for instance, NASA photographs are public domain - but photos of NASA
> activities taken by non-NASA photographers probably aren't).
>
> Also, smart programmers *don't* release their code into the public domain -
> that means that anybody can do anything with it. And that includes stealing
> it,
> using it to make tons of money, and then suing you if they discover a bug.
>  The
> original reason for the BSD and X11 licenses was because you can't stick a
> "hold harmless" clause on something you public-domain.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
> Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
> Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
>

Content of type "text/html" skipped

_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/