RE: Re[2]: pissed off

["Steve Wray" <steve.wray () paradise net nz>]

And the fact that software companies can get away with
claiming to have no liability for the fitness of their products
means that they can continue to produce and sell and make millions
out of their defective products.

> From the Unix Haters Handbook;

<quote>
Real standards ... are for physical objects like steel beams: they let 
designers order a part and incorporate it into their design with 
foreknowledge of how it will perform under real-world conditions. 
"If a beam fails in service, then the builder's lawyers call the beam 
maker's lawyers to discuss things like compensatory and punitive
damages." 
Apparently, the threat of liability keeps most companies honest; those 
who aren't honest presumably get shut down soon enough.
<end quote>

Somehow an entire industry has arisen with no concept of liability
and, therefore, with no concept of honesty.

No honesty *at* *all*


> -----Original Message-----
> From: full-disclosure-admin () lists netsys com 
> [mailto:full-disclosure-admin () lists netsys com] On Behalf Of J G
> Sent: Monday, 28 April 2003 8:23 a.m.
> To: full-disclosure () netsys com
> Subject: Re: Re[2]: [Full-disclosure] pissed off
>
>
> No, no, no. Read the End User License Agreement. Every one I 
> have read says 
> the vulnerabilities belong to the licensee (user) of the 
> software, never the 
> people that put them there.
>
> Ray
>
> > I thought vulnerabilities belonged to people who were 
> writing vulnerable
> > softwares...
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Tired of spam? Get advanced junk mail protection with MSN 8. 
> http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
>
> _______________________________________________
> Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
> Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html

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