3 ms·

When I see the word "security" used like this, I wish the person who used it would be honest about whose security they have in mind. (Also, they should be clea

When I see the word "security" used like this, I wish the person who used it would be honest about whose security they have in mind. (Also, they should be clear about whether they are talking about cyber security, or financial security, or personal security.) It's like the word "protection" in the terms "copy protection" or "content protection". Those at least make clear that it is not the user who is being protected, but it's still disingenuous to suggest that a file is somehow harmed by being copied. If anything, having more copies of a file only makes it safer.

chasil 5y ago
I don't use any licensed software with enforcement methods like this, but it looks trivial to defeat. A string dump of the binary would likely show these directories, and even if they were obfuscated, an strace would reveal them as they probed the file dates.
- zinekeller 5y ago
  It's "trivial" to you, for sure, but as many have noted it's not intended for "advanced" users, but for a target audience who happens to be not computer-savvy.
  - Espressosaurus 5y ago
    And not just not computer-savvy, it's also about making it painful enough a business will pay the license fee rather than trying to jump through hoops to work around licensing problems. If it has to execute on a PC, there is a way to break the protection. It's simply about making it too difficult to bother trying to break the protection.
    - zinekeller 5y ago
      ... well, except for having a separate executable for function-limited trial program, I guess.
da39a3ee 5y ago
Yup. It's just a cliché of modern life. You hear it at train stations: "For security reasons, <anything>". It's the same in medium-size and large companies with "legal". All you need say is "Oh that's required by legal" and no-one applies any rational scrutiny to it because for some reason the "legal" and "security" departments are considered to house minds far superior to those of anyone else.
chii 5y ago
you're basically describing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newspeak https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newspeak which is an age old way to use language for thought control!
floatingatoll 5y ago
"Revenue security" is something every startup, YCs included, ought to spend a notable chunk of their time considering. It fits the bill for clearly stating who's protecting, as well as clearly stating what's protected. And it can be easily applied: "Does having more copies of a file generally improve revenue security?" is probably a solid "no, not generally" with some very interesting exceptions.
- xmprt 5y ago
  "Revenue security" sounds like a fancy term for fraud detection and prevention.
  - floatingatoll 5y ago
    Yes, I hope so, that’s what “copy protection” is and I wanted to maintain that obviousness. DRM is just fancy digital shoplifting “loss prevention” security tags.
  - dotancohen 5y ago
    I think that Rocky Balboa's profession was revenue security, no?

chasil 5y ago

I don't use any licensed software with enforcement methods like this, but it looks trivial to defeat. A string dump of the binary would likely show these directories, and even if they were obfuscated, an strace would reveal them as they probed the file dates.

zinekeller 5y ago
It's "trivial" to you, for sure, but as many have noted it's not intended for "advanced" users, but for a target audience who happens to be not computer-savvy.
- Espressosaurus 5y ago
  And not just not computer-savvy, it's also about making it painful enough a business will pay the license fee rather than trying to jump through hoops to work around licensing problems. If it has to execute on a PC, there is a way to break the protection. It's simply about making it too difficult to bother trying to break the protection.
  - zinekeller 5y ago
    ... well, except for having a separate executable for function-limited trial program, I guess.

da39a3ee 5y ago

Yup. It's just a cliché of modern life. You hear it at train stations: "For security reasons, <anything>". It's the same in medium-size and large companies with "legal". All you need say is "Oh that's required by legal" and no-one applies any rational scrutiny to it because for some reason the "legal" and "security" departments are considered to house minds far superior to those of anyone else.

chii 5y ago

you're basically describing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newspeak https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newspeak which is an age old way to use language for thought control!

floatingatoll 5y ago

"Revenue security" is something every startup, YCs included, ought to spend a notable chunk of their time considering. It fits the bill for clearly stating who's protecting, as well as clearly stating what's protected. And it can be easily applied: "Does having more copies of a file generally improve revenue security?" is probably a solid "no, not generally" with some very interesting exceptions.

xmprt 5y ago
"Revenue security" sounds like a fancy term for fraud detection and prevention.
- floatingatoll 5y ago
  Yes, I hope so, that’s what “copy protection” is and I wanted to maintain that obviousness. DRM is just fancy digital shoplifting “loss prevention” security tags.
- dotancohen 5y ago
  I think that Rocky Balboa's profession was revenue security, no?