Ethical Hacking

Learn to find vulnerabilities before the bad guys do! Gain real world hands on hacking experience in our state of the art hacking lab. Course designed and taught by expert instructors with years of penetration testing experience. 12 student maximum in every class. Certification attempt included in every package.
Computer Forensics Training at InfoSec Institute

Gain the in-demand skills of a certified computer examiner, learn to recover trace data left behind by fraud, theft, and cybercrime perpetrators. Discover the source of computer crime and abuse at your organization so that it never happens again. All of our class sizes are guaranteed to be 12 students or less to facilitate one-on-one interaction with one of our expert instructors.




Network Security FullDisclosure
[Top] [All Lists]

RE: [Full-disclosure] <Cisco Message> Mike Lynn's controversialCisco Sec

Subject: RE: [Full-disclosure] <Cisco Message> Mike Lynn's controversialCisco Security Presentation
Date: Sat, 30 Jul 2005 12:04:39 +1000
Ianal, but I think jurisdictions may have issues with receiving and
using/profiting from stolen 'property', regardless of whether that property
is an information/intangible asset or a tangible asset.

In practical terms the information is 'published' as in available to a broad
range of readers.
Available != free to use without consequences in all possible circumstances.

As to the rights and wrongs at the centre of this thread - let the
discussions proceed!

Lyal


-----Original Message-----
From: full-disclosure-bounces@lists.grok.org.uk
[mailto:full-disclosure-bounces@lists.grok.org.uk] On Behalf Of J.A.
Terranson
Sent: Saturday, 30 July 2005 11:51 AM
To: Jason Coombs
Cc: Russell Smoak; full-disclosure@lists.grok.org.uk; nanog@merit.edu;
fergdawg@netzero.net
Subject: Re: [Full-disclosure] <Cisco Message> Mike Lynn's
controversialCisco Security Presentation



On Fri, 29 Jul 2005, Jason Coombs wrote:

<cutting to the chase>

Now, if RC4 had never been used to create a product and had been kept 
as a trade secret, and that secret had been published, then it would 
not have become, automatically, an unencumbered algorithm that could 
be used by anyone with impunity. There being no way other than theft 
of trade secret for a third party to come to know the algorithm, had a 
court order been obtained to halt the spread of the secret the 
algorithm itself could very well have been kept as protectable 
intellectual property until such time as the company that enjoyed a 
commercial advantage through preservation of their RC4 trade secret 
had concluded the public distribution of a product that somebody else 
could have reverse engineered.

The problem here is essentially one of mass distribution.  There are now
*millions* of copies of these "secrets" in general circulation.  Nobody can
assert with a straight face that anything about Lynn's presentation is not
completely and totally within the public view - and irretrievably so.

-- 
Yours,

J.A. Terranson
sysadmin@mfn.org
0xBD4A95BF


"A stock broker is someone who handles your money until its all gone." Diana
Hubbard (of Scientology fame)
_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/

_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>