Re: InfoSec sleuths beware, Microsoft's attorneys may be knocking at your door

[Cael Abal <lists2 () onryou com>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

| There are clear, admitted cases of reverse engineering by vulnerabiity
| researchers, which are prohibited by EULA, and which MS has so far
| declined to pursue.  Why should this be different?  MS afraid the EULA
| restrictions wouldn't hold up?

Unless the individual who downloaded the leaked source clicked an 'I
agree not to do anything naughty with this source' button, EULAs have
nothing to do with this particular issue.  Similarly, it could be argued
that trade secrets are no longer trade secrets once they reach the
public -- so I guess that leaves Microsoft in the same boat as the MPAA
and the RIAA, trying to prevent copyright infringement?

Incidentally, the MS press release says the leak was "not the result of
any breach of Microsofts corporate network or internal security, nor is
it related to Microsofts Shared Source Initiative or its Government
Security Program..."

So, if it wasn't a breach of security and the leak wasn't through their
Shared Source Initiative partners, what else is left?

http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/press/2004/feb04/02-12WindowsSource.asp

C
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (MingW32)

iD8DBQFAM+apR2vQ2HfQHfsRAhr4AKCsH4l1UID7qgMXyhjiifk5tXU+awCgwCfY
mCb/Z566l3J6h18Gut/7P14=
=vxk+
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html