3 ms·
I don't think we can agree on philosophy. But how can we punish those who misrepresent what their software does, when a large portion of the software out there
by phazmatis 14y ago
I don't think we can agree on philosophy. But how can we punish those who misrepresent what their software does, when a large portion of the software out there was released anonymously? At least, if software developers were held responsible for malicious code in their products, software that could not be traced back to a developer would be easierto create than software created by a company, which would likely need more developers to review code, and insurance to cover possible lawsuits.
- cousin_it 14y agoCommercial software is copyrighted and sold by companies. Open source software comes with copyrights and licenses. What anonymous software are you thinking of? Viruses or something?
- phazmatis 14y agoTOR maybe.
- yk 14y agoIn principle I see the problem, since we could potentially get a lot of lawsuits arguing if strcpy instead strncpy was a typo or malicious intent. However in practice ( and assuming a well written law) most cases should be a lot more clear cut, since an entire rootkit is clearly not a typo. So thinking a little more about these issue, I think a reasonable test would be, if the developer directly profited/exploited an bug.