Home
| Calendar
| Mail Lists
| List Archives
| Desktop SIG
| Hardware Hacking SIG
Wiki | Flickr | PicasaWeb | Video | Maps & Directions | Installfests | Keysignings Linux Cafe | Meeting Notes | Blog | Linux Links | Bling | About BLU |
Guys, I was just wondering if I had missed something like what John was alluding to in the EULA. Thanks for the snippet wiz as Homey don't normally read all that shite. I have read the GPL though :-) I would be highly enraged if anyone could *legally* download any file I had created using their software from my computer for any purpose they wanted, and it was made legal via some EULA. I've come to expect it from ongoing vulnerabilities and cyber-hooligans who are able to defeat current protection, and I would hope my government would be kind enough to present a warrant before searching or seizing anything I had saved to whirling magnetic media, but a vendor - no way. Who knows? --------------- Chuck Young Security Consulting Genuity E-Services -------------------- -----Original Message----- From: Keller, Tim [mailto:Tim.Keller at stratus.com] Sent: Monday, June 17, 2002 11:59 AM To: 'Chuck Young' Cc: discuss at blu.org Subject: RE: M$ && Sending files back? [was: SOT: w2k alters mbr] Chuck, I'm not sure about John's statement, but I do know that the EULA that you sign when you download Microsoft Media Player has the following paragraph in it: * Digital Rights Management (Security). You agree that in order to protect the integrity of content and software protected by digital rights management ("Secure Content"), Microsoft may provide security related updates to the OS Components that will be automatically downloaded onto your computer. These security related updates may disable your ability to copy and/or play Secure Content and use other software on your computer. If we provide such a security update, we will use reasonable efforts to post notices on a web site explaining the update. After reading this Gem of legalese, I take it to mean that microsoft can at its own discretion decide what you can or can not run on your machine. If it feels that "Tim's magical music ripper" is being used to rip cd's into a format that lacks some form of Digital Rights Management built into it, they could send down an update that would inhibit it from running. Thanks, Tim. -----Original Message----- From: Chuck Young [mailto:chy at genuity.com] Sent: Monday, June 17, 2002 11:18 AM To: John Chambers Cc: discuss at blu.org Subject: RE: M$ && Sending files back? [was: SOT: w2k alters mbr] Of course I've never read all of the EULA, but is the statement: "by booting W2K you've also given them permission to send any of your files back to headquarters, to use as they wish." really true? Just askin' for a rundown on where that came from. I'm not an advocate of MS, but I'd like to know if this is the real deal or if you are just taking poetic liberties here. I mean, I like poetry too... --------------- Chuck Young Security Consulting Genuity E-Services -------------------- -----Original Message----- From: discuss-admin at blu.org [mailto:discuss-admin at blu.org]On Behalf Of John Chambers Sent: Monday, June 17, 2002 10:58 AM To: discuss at blu.org Subject: Re: SOT: w2k alters mbr | Buying a new computer, (o joy, (note lowercase)), | I get w2k with it. | | Being a curious sort I install it, everything | works okay except that w2k sets itself (hda3) | active, stealing the next boot. | | Is there any way to stop w2k from doing this, | or to have grub fix it? So they're still doing this. A couple years ago, I found the paragraph in one of MS's pages of fine print where they state that Windows will check all the partitions during a boot, and any not containing a valid MS OS may be marked non-bootable. This is to help you, of course, since you wouldn't want to be confused by accidentally booting a partition that doesn't contain a valid OS. I also found another paragraph which states that by running the MS OS, you give them permission to do as they wish to any file on the disk. So you should be glad they only modified the master boot record. By running W2K, you've given them permission to wipe the linux partition clean. You might also make sure that you don't have anything on your disk that you don't want MS to use, since by booting W2K you've also given them permission to send any of your files back to headquarters, to use as they wish. Of course, if you wanted to challenge this in court, it would probably be declared illegal. But you first make sure that you have a couple million $ in your legal fund ... _______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list Discuss at blu.org http://www.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss _______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list Discuss at blu.org http://www.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
BLU is a member of BostonUserGroups | |
We also thank MIT for the use of their facilities. |