At 10:01 PM -0800 2/19/00, Ryan Russell wrote:
>> So are you suggesting that perhaps it is time software such as ISS, etc,
>> to not only be made available with strict controls over which targets
>> they can be used against (article about this went to bugtraq some time
>> ago) but also be required for those buying the product/license keys
>> in order to undertake such work ? I think this is almost a inevitable.
>> I can't see why professionals would object to this - every `respectable'
>> procession has some sort of official "badging" which is required before
>> you practice in it.
>
>Because then if I want to write a tool, I have to take on the
>responsibility of serial numbering, licensing, probably some sort of
>insurance, etc.. which means I can't do it for free anymore, can't release
>source...
>
>It's going to squash the little guys.
>
>It may in fact be inevitable, but it sucks.
>
i doubt this will happen.
first, this would seem to attack the open code/freeware movement that is
gathering steam.
second, it would *not* stop people from writing their own code; many times
the hard part [tedious part] of writing code for sale [distribution] is
covering all the things a user who isnt you will do to explode your code.
if you are the only person using the code, it can be very quick&dirty and
at this moment there are alot of people who can write quick&dirty code that
can scan ports etc.
michael
------------------------------------------------------------------
www.panix.com\~cassidy
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Fri Apr 13 2001 - 14:06:45 PDT