Full Disclosure mailing list archives
Re: Web sites compromised by IIS attack
From: Denis Dimick <denis () dimick net>
Date: Thu, 1 Jul 2004 19:57:48 -0700 (PDT)
Barry, I have to agree with you one once a company changes the code then they own it. However wrapping the same old software in an RPM to me does not change it enough to have "someone" else own the code. I do find it "funny" that sendmail and BIND have been thrown out in the e-mails (don't think it was you) But these two applications are some of the most buggy bits of code ever written. There are far better aplications out there if someone want to run a mail or dns server if you ask me. Denis On Thu, 1 Jul 2004, Barry Fitzgerald wrote:
Denis Dimick wrote:Did M$ write ftp.exe? If so then they "own" it, they own the sources and all rights to the code. Redhat owns very little of the code you get on there CD. DenisI think that the demarcation line for this is where money changed hands. First of all, ftp.exe is a common example because the ftp.exe that MS has traditionally included with various versions of windows has text data in it's binary that's part of the BSD license. So, ftp.exe is "borrowed" code, so to speak. First, I'm all for Free Software businesses (anyone who knows me knows this). But, once a company chooses to redistribute Free Software code, they "own" it for all intents and purposes. The original authors aren't responsible for it because distributions can (and in many cases do) modify the code before they redistribute it. Red Hat takes the money, they get the burden of support. That's the way the model works. :) -Barry _______________________________________________ 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
Current thread:
- RE: Web sites compromised by IIS attack, (continued)
- RE: Web sites compromised by IIS attack Stuart Fox (DSL AK) (Jun 30)
- RE: Web sites compromised by IIS attack Denis Dimick (Jul 01)
- RE: [OT] Web sites compromised by IIS attack Eric Paynter (Jul 01)
- Re: [OT] Web sites compromised by IIS attack codec (Jul 01)
- Re: [OT] Web sites compromised by IIS attack Denis Dimick (Jul 01)
- Re: [OT] Web sites compromised by IIS attack ken (Jul 01)
- Re: [OT] Web sites compromised by IIS attack Denis Dimick (Jul 01)
- Re: [OT] Web sites compromised by IIS attack Denis Dimick (Jul 01)
- RE: Web sites compromised by IIS attack Denis Dimick (Jul 01)
- RE: Web sites compromised by IIS attack Stuart Fox (DSL AK) (Jun 30)
- Re: Web sites compromised by IIS attack Barry Fitzgerald (Jul 01)
- Re: Web sites compromised by IIS attack Denis Dimick (Jul 01)
- Re: Web sites compromised by IIS attack Barry Fitzgerald (Jul 02)
- Re: Web sites compromised by IIS attack Denis Dimick (Jul 02)
- Re: Web sites compromised by IIS attack Barry Fitzgerald (Jul 02)
- Re: Web sites compromised by IIS attack Maarten (Jul 03)
- Re: Web sites compromised by IIS attack Barry Fitzgerald (Jul 06)