| ??? 02/18/08 22:11 Read: times |
#151076 - not so sure Responding to: ???'s previous message |
Andy Neil said:
One of the recently deleted "security circumvention" threads was about "cracking" the licence security of commercial pc-based tools. Craig Steiner said:
You're probably right, but that was unusual Not sure it's that unusual? Threads asking for "cracks" or copies of licensed software seem to me to have a similar frequency to microcontroller security circumvention? Maybe that's just my perception? and is simply deleted on the basis of it being patently illegal. In light of recent discussions, and the fact that people seem to have no qualms about posting such requests in public, maybe it isn't so "patently illegal" to them? Maybe this needs to be specifically stated as an explicit example of what is prohibited? Then again, the people who post such stuff are probably unlikely to read the rules anyhow... :-( |
| Topic | Author | Date |
| MODIFICATION TO FORUM RULES | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| What about posting recipes for lock bit breaking? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Same | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Why only microcontrollers? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| good point - good catch | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Circumvention | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| not so sure | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Positive change | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Report to moderator 'Tab' needed | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Seconded! | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Coming soon | 01/01/70 00:00 |