| ??? 02/19/08 08:41 Read: times |
#151105 - Malund you come to conclusion very early ! Responding to: ???'s previous message |
Erik Malund said:
On that basis, I'm tempted to add a rule that prohibits the "cracking" discussions. But on the other hand I do agree that security through obscurity is of little value and is inherently dangerous in that it can provide a false sense of security. If there are weaknesses in security, I believe security is enhanced by discussing them so that: 1) People know they can't depend on them. 2) Manufacturers will be inclined to produce better security options in the future.
Make it blatantly clear that anybody that offer 'help' in cracking will be banned forever. OR You ar Steve immediately delete any post that has even a hint of 'help' in cracking and warn the poster that 3 strikes and you are out. OR install a 'rating' "code stealing" that will alert you and Steve for immediate action should you agree OR something else. I just "get sick" when I see (possibly well meaning) posters post "to circumvent this protection, you can" Erik The discussion isnt over yet . No one here is promoting stealing we are discussing can we talk about loop holes in security systems which is not a crime or thievery . I my self not know how Phillips guys secure their MCUs in relation to Atmel people . I feel teaching someone hacking MCU shouldnt be allowed here but in general we should carry on debates related to the weakness of the security system . Its our right to discuss or ask security related issues to protect our product and that can only happen If we discuss how foolproof the protection mechanism is. AP |
