From ygingras@ygingras.net Wed Sep 4 11:37:37 2002 Return-Path: Delivered-To: yyyy@localhost.example.com Received: from localhost (jalapeno [127.0.0.1]) by jmason.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3BC9E16F21 for ; Wed, 4 Sep 2002 11:37:01 +0100 (IST) Received: from jalapeno [127.0.0.1] by localhost with IMAP (fetchmail-5.9.0) for jm@localhost (single-drop); Wed, 04 Sep 2002 11:37:01 +0100 (IST) Received: from outgoing.securityfocus.com (outgoing2.securityfocus.com [66.38.151.26]) by dogma.slashnull.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g83MAuZ05212 for ; Tue, 3 Sep 2002 23:10:57 +0100 Received: from lists.securityfocus.com (lists.securityfocus.com [66.38.151.19]) by outgoing.securityfocus.com (Postfix) with QMQP id 6C1F08F616; Tue, 3 Sep 2002 15:13:29 -0600 (MDT) Mailing-List: contact secprog-help@securityfocus.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: Delivered-To: mailing list secprog@securityfocus.com Delivered-To: moderator for secprog@securityfocus.com Received: (qmail 1222 invoked from network); 3 Sep 2002 20:11:16 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-15" From: Yannick Gingras To: secprog@securityfocus.com Subject: Re: Secure Sofware Key Date: Tue, 3 Sep 2002 16:26:15 -0400 X-Mailer: KMail [version 1.3.2] References: <20020829204345.91D1833986@LINPDC.eclipsys.qc.ca> <15733.3398.363187.572002@cerise.nosuchdomain.co.uk> In-Reply-To: <15733.3398.363187.572002@cerise.nosuchdomain.co.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Message-Id: <20020903192326.C9DA533986@LINPDC.eclipsys.qc.ca> X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-9.9 required=7.0 tests=AWL,IN_REP_TO,KNOWN_MAILING_LIST,PGP_MESSAGE, QUOTED_EMAIL_TEXT,REFERENCES,SPAM_PHRASE_03_05 version=2.41-cvs X-Spam-Level: -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 > What do you mean by "CD-Key or the like" (I presume that "of" was a > typo)? And what do you mean by "unbreakable"? "of" was a typo Unbreakable would mean here that no one, even previously authorised entity, could use the system without paying the periodic subscription fee. > You need to be far more explicit about the problem which you wish to > solve, and about the constraints involved. It could be an online system that work 95% offline but poll frequently an offsite server. No mass production CDs, maybe mass personalised d/l like Sun JDK. Nothing is fixed yet, we are looking at the way a software can be protected from unauthorized utilisation. Is the use of "trusted hardware" really worth it ? Does it really make it more secure ? Look at the DVDs. - -- Yannick Gingras Coder for OBB : Obdurately Buteonine Bellwether http://OpenBeatBox.org -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iD8DBQE9dRrnuv7G0DNFO+QRAk8nAKClAhTmyrUgP3ko+DEjcvj0mqfjzACgwQvo WZ6/CMUA23HCMZVycd7XD1Q= =V2G8 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----