24-Apr-2024 06:50 GMT.		 UNDER CONSTRUCTION
Anonymous, there are 160 items in your selection (but only 60 shown due to limitation) [1 - 50] [51 - 100] [101 - 150] [151 - 160]
[News] Elbox clarifies its positionANN.lu
Posted on 18-Nov-2002 16:08 GMT by Lewis Mistreated160 comments
View flat
View list
M. Wloczysiak has just posted an open letter on Elbox site, in which he explains that the Rigid Disk Block trashing code can effectively be found in all their drivers, but it's triggered only if someone tries to crack 'em and, according to him, the malicious code makes no damages, other than the five minutes of work needed to restore the RDSK sector [which] does not seem to be a heavy punishment for stealing and/or cracking software...
Elbox clarifies its position : Comment 101 of 160ANN.lu
Posted by Graham on 18-Nov-2002 19:27 GMT
In reply to Comment 97 (Graham):
I meant, of course, 1990, not 1984! Whups. heh.
Elbox clarifies its position : Comment 102 of 160ANN.lu
Posted by Q on 18-Nov-2002 19:29 GMT
In reply to Comment 96 (Kronos):
>>After I get all that hw, and wait for a month, I hope that I already have
>>AmigaOS 4.0 - so no Elbox-drivers anymore.
>And how should that work when ELBOX only gives the info about their >pci.library, but not to the underlying HW to Hyperion ?
>You do remember that ELBOX does also not want OpenPCI on their board, so >there will
>be NO non-ELBOX-(lowlevel)drivers.
You might be right, and I have asked this question multiple times. The response I got from AmigaOS4.0 mailinglist from Hyperion employee, was that Mediator is supported in AmigaOS4. He also repeated Ben Hermans' statement from WOASE, when Hermans said that there is no longer need for three different pci.libraries for different pci-busboards in AmigaOS 4.0.
So I truly hope you are misinformed, since this is the only reason I no longer consider Mediator as a viable option to upgrade my Amiga.
-Q
Elbox clarifies its position : Comment 103 of 160ANN.lu
Posted by alan buxey on 18-Nov-2002 19:37 GMT
..so, no apology, just some more 'we are correct' statements :-(
no, for some LAW FACTS.
Under european law, the writing of any code that is designed to deliberately
damage any part of a computer system is illegal. no matter HOW it is triggered
(and some other guy in this thread is 100% correct about the new virus threat
that this Elbox code now presents Mediator users....one small piece of code
slipped into some normal program and BANG. user spends a long evening
wondering why their Amiga no longer boots...and then time to fix a thing
which WASNT their fault)
second fact
Under European law it is legal to reverse engineer code for the sole purpose
of providing compatability.
If Elbox dont want people to use their driver code on another PCI solution
(which is a fair point) then the solution is to create a more intelligent
link between PCI.library and the card driver - maybe some key which depends
upon registration code, firmware code and then some checksumming. or maybe
even add use/add a feature which isnt present in other PCI systems.
there have been plenty of companies/products which suffered damaging results
after information about their copyprotection became public...i hope
Elbox doesnt want to join their ranks
Elbox DO make some great, innovative, hardware. as they always are saying. however, they also make great, big, silly, mistakes. and never apologise.
hardware9.5/10 (nothing in this world is perfect)
public relations0.5/10
Elbox clarifies its position : Comment 104 of 160ANN.lu
Posted by Q on 18-Nov-2002 19:38 GMT
In reply to Comment 96 (Kronos):
To Kronos:
First of all, I must apologize. It was mediator mailinglist, not AmigaOS4.0-list.
Here is the conversation with the major pieces of information:
QUESTION: I just read the one week old transcript (of Ben Hermans' speech) from WOASE concerning AmigaOS4.0. Well, here is part of what he said: "Generic PCI library... Have you ever wondered why it's neccesary to have three different PCI libraries? Well, it's not really neccesary, so we're gonna get rid of that, I hope." Three PCI libraries? So there is hope, that Hyperion will support mediators?
ANSWER: "Hyperion has all required documentation from mediator and prometheus to create a generic PCI.library so they will work.
It does depends on the HW if DMA is supported on the boards ofcourse.
As it looks now Grex range will NOT be supported because of 'unknown'
reasons :)
Timothy De Groote
Hyperion Entertainment"
- Q
Elbox clarifies its position : Comment 105 of 160ANN.lu
Posted by DaveW on 18-Nov-2002 19:41 GMT
In reply to Comment 93 (fabio Alemagna):
You did? All I have so far is the computer misuse act referenced. No doubt it is somewhere in this mess of a thread. I have to keep skipping posts which
are just childish ranting to get to the "meat" so I probably have missed it.
Ill look again :)
Elbox clarifies its position : Comment 106 of 160ANN.lu
Posted by JoannaK on 18-Nov-2002 19:49 GMT
In reply to Comment 77 (DaveW):
Tarnishing their image? You people are totally skrewd up. What could I do to cause more confusion than announcements made by McEwen and others? What could tarnish them any more that having trojans on Device drivers? I'm not miracle maker (nor as important some people seem to think)...
Less than week ago it was my personal fault (on Amiga-one list) that AmigaOne hardware is months late cause I have not spend my free time to debug it for them. Now it's suddenly my resposibility to cover up this major F*** UP that happened only because some Not_so_clever polish viruswriters didn't understand basic terms like Right and Wrong ???
Besides, covering up illegal act is illegal. And I have no intention on helping Companies like Elbox on their mess. If they can't clean it up, then let them die away. I just wonder how those resellers (like vesalia who has not removed Spider from their catalog even after this) are going to manage.
Elbox clarifies its position : Comment 107 of 160ANN.lu
Posted by DaveW on 18-Nov-2002 19:53 GMT
In reply to Comment 106 (JoannaK):
You misunderstand:
"What exactly will you achieve apart from clueless ranting and tarnishing of the image of Amiga and Amiga related companies? "
Means the clueless ranters will be on Slashdot.
All I am asking is that you think about WHY you want to put it on Slashdot and WHAT BENEFIT you think you will gain.
Im not talking about Bill and Fleecy, Im not talking about anyone else, I am talking about you who does her fair share of pot shots at the Amiga Inc PR machine who seems to me to be indicating that she is about to make a serious error of tactics.
So please answer the question, what do you have to gain?
( Oh and I love the "You People" touch, classic flame war material )
Dave.
Elbox clarifies its position : Comment 108 of 160ANN.lu
Posted by DaveW on 18-Nov-2002 20:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 107 (DaveW):
PS to help you further there is a big difference between a coverup ( which is not what we are talking about here ) and broadcasting news to users that will just jump on the bandwagon and misunderstand what it is all about and just spread crap ( which is my point ).
You can't seriously expect me to think that Slashdot readers ( with their marvellous history in this respect ) will not turn this, within 20 responses, into "Amigas contain Trojan Code - don't buy an Amiga" or even "MorphOS is a trojan Horse". There is no bounds to the stupidity you see on Slashdot. They most certainly RARELY read more than just the banner headline.
The best you can do is help those asking what to buy make an informed choice and allow media organs like ANN, Amiga.org, Total Amiga get the message to the wider interested parties.
If you are going to vent a spleen at Elbox, vent it at them and not everything Amiga related which despite your good intentions is what would happen if you
broadcast this to the world on Slashdot.
Elbox clarifies its position : Comment 109 of 160ANN.lu
Posted by Bertybassett on 18-Nov-2002 20:01 GMT
i wonder how many of the people on this list that bitch about Elbox
actually use Elbox products. There's 2 types of people in this world,
those who bitch and those who get on with it. I dare say that most of
the people that bitch about Elbox don't even use their products. i
don't condone what Elbox did, but i understand why they did it. Their
are entirely too many arseholes left in the amiga community that spoil
it for the rest of us. Funny, that. A CRACKER opens up Elbox code
illegally, then bitches that Elbox are using illegal practices which
don't actually cause any harm! Well i'm happy with my mediator and
powerflyer and shall continue to buy Elbox products.
Elbox clarifies its position : Comment 110 of 160ANN.lu
Posted by [JC] on 18-Nov-2002 20:02 GMT
Quite frankly, Elbox have had it.
They have just admitted outright to committing a crime. Furthermore, in most countries, the suppliers of Elbox goods are now liable for any damage caused by Elbox's drivers. This means that:
1) Amiga hardware shops not wishing to potentially be prosecuted must now discontinue sale of ALL Elbox hardware, and
2) said hardware shops now have cause to bring legal action against Elbox for loss of sales, devaluation of stock, etc...
Furthermore, Elbox are now going to have thier drivers reverse engineered, cracked, the "protection" code removed, and spread all over the place so that Amiga users do not have to fear about use of potentially dangerous drivers.
Hell, if I was prepared to accept hassle, I'd do it myself.
Elbox clarifies its position : Comment 111 of 160ANN.lu
Posted by Anonymous on 18-Nov-2002 20:06 GMT
In reply to Comment 109 (Bertybassett):
You should go and enchance your glossary my friend. Crackers are usually people that remove protection from code. Reverseengineering as it happened here is not illegal in Germany and maybe not illegal in other Countries. So please take care when using the terms Illegal here. No one cracked the drivers from Elbox and redistributed them in a modified way. They only got reverseengineered by some fellow User and by mistake he discovered the RDB killercode from Elbox (which is for our LAW), which on the otherhand is illegal (the code part). It's illegal having stuff in the products that is known to HARM other peoples system. Hope it's not to hard for you to get this in your head.
Elbox clarifies its position : Comment 112 of 160ANN.lu
Posted by Johan "Graak" Forsberg on 18-Nov-2002 20:18 GMT
Bash Elbox all you want for this malicious code, but please don´t go around screaming "their hardware is crap" etc. because of this. The Mediator is the best PCI-solution for classic-Amigas. I had both a Mediator PCI 1200 (with Voodoo3, 100Mbit NIC, TV-card, SoundBlaster 128) and a PowerFlyer, and it worked perfectly, I never had any problems. The Mediator was definitly the most worthwhile upgrade I made for my Amiga.
Elbox clarifies its position : Comment 113 of 160ANN.lu
Posted by NihilVor on 18-Nov-2002 20:21 GMT
In reply to Comment 111 (Anonymous):
I believe they stated that they were making a driver for personal use.
What I find ridiculous is that Elbox claims that they did this as a deterrence. The whole point of a deterrence is that somebody knows about the deterrent—otherwise it is quite pointless. They must have known that somebody would find this; after all, Amiga users always hack they hell out of hardware to increase the usefulness and prolong the life of the technology. Soon as someone found this, they must have known that the information would be passed on—forcing them to remove the code (as by their own omission it serves no purpose now, and could only harm users through viruses). It is not so much that I find what they did reprehensible—I find it utterly idiotic.
Elbox clarifies its position : Comment 114 of 160ANN.lu
Posted by Anonymous on 18-Nov-2002 20:23 GMT
In reply to Comment 112 (Johan "Graak" Forsberg):
Their HARDWARE is protected too. Look at this sentence!
> > Yes, we use anti-piracy safeguard measures. They are well thought, thoroughly
> > tested and carefully included in our software and hardware.
Software _AND_ Hardware
Who knows whats inside their Hardware and what it causes if something doesn't work properly.
Elbox clarifies its position : Comment 115 of 160ANN.lu
Posted by JoannaK on 18-Nov-2002 20:30 GMT
In reply to Comment 108 (DaveW):
Well.. frankly all I personally want is that Elbox realises HOW big mistake they have done. And for some reason I don't belive me sending couple E-mails to them would help a bit. And they do deserve a lot after what they tried to accompilish here on Ann.lu, treathening board admins and contacting ISP:s because someone told the truth about them on web forum. That alone is so dense, not to mention installing Trojans to users computers that's obviously criminal act.
Elbox clarifies its position : Comment 116 of 160ANN.lu
Posted by gz on 18-Nov-2002 20:31 GMT
In reply to Comment 109 (Bertybassett):
>>Funny, that. A CRACKER opens up Elbox code
illegally.
Dude, I don't know where ya been sleeping all the time, but calling chris hodges a cracker... tsk tsk
If I was him I'd sue your ass for slander and accusations (well I wouldn't go that far) but man I bet he's pissed when he reads your comment about him.
Elbox clarifies its position : Comment 117 of 160ANN.lu
Posted by gz on 18-Nov-2002 20:36 GMT
many ppl have read too much about elbox's pr bull (which is the only bull where the word CRACKER has been used in the context of this matter) And have forgot where it all began. It didn't come out because of some red sector dude had banged the code open to CRACK it and then spread around!
Elbox clarifies its position : Comment 118 of 160ANN.lu
Posted by Jupp3 on 18-Nov-2002 20:41 GMT
It seems, that many people here compare Elbox people to people known as "Hackers" claiming that they're the same which, of course, is very untrue.
Hackers usually work for free, while Elbox people (expect to) get paid for doing the same thing.
Elbox clarifies its position : Comment 119 of 160ANN.lu
Posted by brotheris on 18-Nov-2002 20:42 GMT
Now imagine if this protection removal was only bit shifting and more masking of rdb trashing routines. That would out of this world =)
Elbox clarifies its position : Comment 120 of 160ANN.lu
Posted by DaveW on 18-Nov-2002 20:43 GMT
In reply to Comment 115 (JoannaK):
Well if Elbox were the fly by night cowboys that the lynch mob on here
is making them out to be then they would not have continued to support Mediator
owners with top quality customer service.
Looking at this dispassionately I would say they have made a serious error
of judgement and are being nailed to the wall for it. I don't think you need
to do anything else. I have no doubt that this whole saga will make it into the pages of Total Amiga and into the knowledge of most sane Amiga users.
Dave.
Elbox clarifies its position : Comment 121 of 160ANN.lu
Posted by Anders Kjeldsen on 18-Nov-2002 20:46 GMT
In reply to Comment 81 (Eva):
If you had a virus, I think it would be able to erase you RDB on its own :p
Elbox clarifies its position : Comment 122 of 160ANN.lu
Posted by Mikael Burman on 18-Nov-2002 20:49 GMT
In reply to Comment 79 (Anonymous):
It seems you´ve got bad luck with your Powerflyer. I´ve been using mine for, lets
see...3 years...or is it 4!? Damn, can´t remember.. :)
The only harddrive that has collapsed, using Powerflyer is one of those IBM
Deskstars... after 1 year... :)
Elbox clarifies its position : Comment 123 of 160ANN.lu
Posted by James on 18-Nov-2002 20:52 GMT
In reply to Comment 11 (elektro):
"wtf?!! what in the f. gives elbox the right to mess with your HD?!! they have absolutely no right to f. up your hd and you know it."
And no person has a right to reverse engineer it/hack it either. Although it is illegal for the presence of such self-protecting code in some countries. It is illegal in ALL countries to hack anothers software.
All the people who bitch here about it have totally lost sight of the issues at hand. Sure it's evil if something f'cks with your HDD. But when it only does so when something malicious is done, how can you condone it then unless you condone the person who modified the program. If you do otherwise your a total hypocrite.
Authors have the right to the conditions / usage of their software. They have the right to protect their software. And in all fairness, what it does do, is hardly that bad either. Taking 5 mins to fix anyhow. And it will only happen if you BREAK THE LAW. So why are so many people here condoning something which would not happen to them unless they BROKE THE LAW.
If you don't like a software's anti-piracy measures, simple, don't use it. But don't just not use it because of some stupid reasons people are giving it here, which only exist due to illegal practices.
This is like the debate people have here in Australia about police having the right to fine you for possession of drugs. Now if you didn't break the law in the first place, if they came upto you, you'd be fine, but people who INSIST on breaking the law are whining about getting fined for doing so. Use some common sense people, and bitch about things worth bitching about, not this.
Elbox clarifies its position : Comment 124 of 160ANN.lu
Posted by DaveW on 18-Nov-2002 20:59 GMT
In reply to Comment 123 (James):
Well that has got to be one of the more sensible posts I have read on this thread. Elbox make much of the fact that their retaliation code does not trash any user data. This may be splitting hairs.
Problem is how many users would be able to back out from this without understanding exactly what has occurred?
Nowhere out there does it define what rights a company has to protect its software from piracy - that is measures that it can take on the system.
My personal opinion is that this was a serious PR own goal for Elbox but then
Kruse got nailed to the wall too for the "privacy" over invalid keys issue.
How far are companies allowed to go to protect their software from piracy?
Elbox clarifies its position : Comment 125 of 160ANN.lu
Posted by Johan Rönnblom on 18-Nov-2002 21:00 GMT
I'm not sure if there's a big point from a virus makers view to use
the Elbox code deliberately, but I think a not-so-evil virus is one
likely cause for accidentally triggering the Elbox code. Viruses tend
to do some strange, "tricky", things, for example it might want to set
itself off every time some library is called -> so it modifies
pci.library -> so checksum is changed -> which sets off the RDB
killer -> so a normally not very destructive virus now has some very
serious consequences.
Btw, as for what this code is. Well it's not deterrance, since it's
secret. Seems more like revenge. Personally I've always thought hate
is something irrational that's likely to strike back at the hater, and
I guess it's proven one more time..?
Elbox clarifies its position : Comment 126 of 160ANN.lu
Posted by Anonymous on 18-Nov-2002 21:01 GMT
In reply to Comment 123 (James):
http://www.lawplusplus.com/column10.htm
http://www.lgu.com/publications/softcopy/22.shtml
http://tempest.wheatonma.edu/~sbenz/reveng/
Elbox clarifies its position : Comment 127 of 160ANN.lu
Posted by Alkis Tsapanidis on 18-Nov-2002 21:04 GMT
In reply to Comment 123 (James):
First of all, reverse engineering is legal in many countries, if you don't
spread what you did. Secondly, it could happen if anything jumps to that code
by a mistake after a crash, or trigger it, if anything touches the longword
holding the checksum.
In the not memory protected AmigaOS environment both are possible (while
unlikely).
Elbox clarifies its position : Comment 128 of 160ANN.lu
Posted by DaveW on 18-Nov-2002 21:07 GMT
I think the odds are against an accidental triggering. I mean get this, it
is supposedly in pci.library and there are literally thousands of Mediator
owners out there hitting random keys, running alsorts of crap and doing
soft reboots all over the place and not once in the Mediator mailing list
do I see anything about anyone losing all or part of the RDB.
Now if you go out of the way to reproduce improbable conditions then you are
going to reproduce them.
Elbox clarifies its position : Comment 129 of 160ANN.lu
Posted by redrumloa on 18-Nov-2002 21:09 GMT
In reply to Comment 123 (James):
Huh? It has been demostrated that this code could very likely, and eventually most probably, be triggered by honest Joe-six-pack Amiga user.
How someone can condon illegal tactics far worse than M$ themselves have ever stooped is beyond me. This isn't trivial, this is serious s***! Sure most of us are hobbiest who could repair a hankered RDB, but that's not the point! Are they selling a serious product or are they selling a geek toy?
Even IF your arguement that only hackers could be affected was true. that doesnt justify it. Unsolicited email is illegal, does that give me the right to track down the person sending it and blast their head off with a shot gun?
Please stop (plural)trying to be an apologist for an Amiga hardware company simply because there are so few of them. in the end it does NOT help the market, it only further hurts it.
Elbox clarifies its position : Comment 130 of 160ANN.lu
Posted by Keith Blakemore-Noble on 18-Nov-2002 21:22 GMT
In reply to Comment 123 (James):
""wtf?!! what in the f. gives elbox the right to mess with your HD?!! they have absolutely no right to f. up your hd and you know it."
And no person has a right to reverse engineer it/hack it either. Although it is illegal for the presence of such self-protecting code in some countries. It is illegal in ALL countries to hack anothers software. "
Nicer try, even though you get the important part of your claim 100% wrong.
Yes, what Elbox have done is completely illegal in the EU and the US and most other countries.
HOWEVER, in those countries it is PERFECTLY LEGAL to reverse-engineer code for educational use, personal use or for reasons of interoperability.
Now, given that the result of Chris reverse-engineering Elbox's code (an act which, despite your claims, is perfectly LEGAL) was to bring to everyone's attention just how ILLEGAL the actions of Elbox really are (and let's remember Elbox's reaction to this - demanding that CK remove all traces of the thread announcing the discovery because they knew they were in the wrong and had been rumbled), I think we shoudl be glad that he did excersise is legal right to reverse-engineer their illegal code.
Elbox clarifies its position : Comment 131 of 160ANN.lu
Posted by strobe on 18-Nov-2002 21:26 GMT
Well if nobody else will say it, I will...
BOOOOOO!
Elbox clarifies its position : Comment 132 of 160ANN.lu
Posted by Keith Blakemore-Noble on 18-Nov-2002 21:27 GMT
In reply to Comment 123 (James):
PS your assertion that Elbox's illegal RDB-trashing code will only be executed if you break the law and priate their software is also blatantly false, as several people have already demonstrated in this and related threads.
Even ignoring the possibility of a virus targeting the code to trigger it, it has been demonstrated in these threads that corruption of a SINGLE BYTE of the driver in memory can trigger the code.
Given that AmigaOS has zero memory protection, it is perfectly possible for a buggy piece of code to accidentally write to a block of memory which just happens to contain the driver - BINGO. Your system will now trash the RDB when you next go on or off line.
Elbox clarifies its position : Comment 133 of 160ANN.lu
Posted by Alkis Tsapanidis on 18-Nov-2002 21:28 GMT
In reply to Comment 132 (Keith Blakemore-Noble):
It seems that I was wrong in that claim, specific stuff have to be touched.
Elbox clarifies its position : Comment 134 of 160ANN.lu
Posted by Chris Hodges on 18-Nov-2002 21:37 GMT
In reply to Comment 130 (Keith Blakemore-Noble):
@Keith
> Now, given that the result of Chris reverse-engineering Elbox's code (an act which, despite your claims, is perfectly LEGAL)
Just to get some things straight ;) I didn't disassemble the code (even if it would have been perfectly legal), I just checked the memory dump for certain keywords mentioned in the previously published disassembled code by Qwe.
Elbox clarifies its position : Comment 135 of 160ANN.lu
Posted by bbrockie on 18-Nov-2002 21:38 GMT
Sure would be nice if one of those drivers actually turned out to be buggy.. Oh, I'll just copy this file to there, and then.. WTF?? Where's my drive gone? ;)
No, serious! - I wouldn't touch those drivers, even if I had the hardware for it. There will always be freebie's (the users of pirated software) out there, and no matter how hard you try to avoid them pirating your software, you always end up fighting a loosing battle.
So what do we end up with? - Well, you would loose me as a customer for sure, and the crackers would have broken your code anyways. 1-0 pirates vs. you
Just my 5 cents! ;)
Elbox clarifies its position : Comment 136 of 160ANN.lu
Posted by gz on 18-Nov-2002 21:38 GMT
In reply to Comment 118 (Jupp3):
>>Hackers usually work for free, while Elbox people (expect to) get paid for doing the same thing.
I agree, their action is not justifiable even using piratism as excuse. Especially not after they first acted as innocent and made threats at mr.kemp and then later when they could'nt hold back the truth anymore, suddenly admit it's been there all along.
Anyway, as a company they can't really come clean and just say "ok you guys, you caught us redhanded. We just wanted you to be oblivious of such code" they have to make a stand for themselves, and judging by some of the apologistic comments I've seen it has paid out for them to write pr nonsense. There's always someone with a softspot for marketing speeches and blind loyalism. Sadly that is what is an incentive for a company with questionable morale to work in the way ebox now have.
Elbox clarifies its position : Comment 137 of 160ANN.lu
Posted by pf on 18-Nov-2002 21:56 GMT
Regarding the powerflyer it seems that the Gold version is not affected by
these kind of problems. The early ones seem to have this famous "protection"
[or is it a bug?]. Anyway the behaviour is quite the same.
Elbox clarifies its position : Comment 138 of 160ANN.lu
Posted by megol on 18-Nov-2002 21:58 GMT
In reply to Comment 123 (James):
>"wtf?!! what in the f. gives elbox the right to mess with your HD?!! they have absolutely no right to f. up your hd and you know it."
>And no person has a right to reverse engineer it/hack it either. Although it is illegal for the presence of such self-protecting code in some countries. It is illegal in ALL countries to hack anothers software.
No. Reverse engineering is legal in all countries I have ever heard of, while willingly inserting code to destroy data is illegal in all civilized countries.
[This will probably change soon as all EU countries implements the new DMCA-lookalike laws, making anything that can be related to bypass a digital copyright-protection system illegal - but even then inserting code to destroy data will be illegal]
>All the people who bitch here about it have totally lost sight of the issues at hand. Sure it's evil if something f'cks with your HDD. But when it only does so when something malicious is done, how can you condone it then unless you condone the person who modified the program. If you do otherwise your a total hypocrite.
No. On the amiga (or any other system without protection between processes) code like this can be triggered (unlikly but possible) if another program has a bug that jumps to the trashing code. Even if this _was_not_the_case_ it still is illegal to willingly include such code.
>Authors have the right to the conditions / usage of their software. They have the right to protect their software. And in all fairness, what it does do, is hardly that bad either. Taking 5 mins to fix anyhow. And it will only happen if you BREAK THE LAW. So why are so many people here condoning something which would not happen to them unless they BROKE THE LAW.
No. Authors have the right to control the conditions for distribution/use of their software _if_ and _only_ if those conditions follows the law. No EULA can override a law. By inserting this mallicious code and then distributing it Elbox have broken a criminal law (do not know if this is the right name - what I mean it is not a law enforced by civilians but the state) just as if they willingly distributed a virus. And as I wrote the code can be triggered without "breaking the law".
>If you don't like a software's anti-piracy measures, simple, don't use it. But don't just not use it because of some stupid reasons people are giving it here, which only exist due to illegal practices.
Bullshit. Anti-piracy code have no right to break the law, sure in the 1980s some anti-piracy codes trashed hardware without anyone reacting much but since then new laws have been made in almost all countries over the world (after the wave of computer-breakins where the only thing the crackers could be persecuted for was stealing power).
>This is like the debate people have here in Australia about police having the right to fine you for possession of drugs. Now if you didn't break the law in the first place, if they came upto you, you'd be fine, but people who INSIST on breaking the law are whining about getting fined for doing so. Use some common sense people, and bitch about things worth bitching about, not this.
I am beginning to suspect that you yourself have tried some of those drugs. Bitching about a company that break the law, lies, tries to eliminate discussions about their f**k-ups is the right thing to do. No, scratch that. Reporting them to the police is the right thing to do, but I think that would hurt the amiga-community more than Elbox.
(Sorry for my very broken english, have been some years since I last wrote anything more than a few words in it :-/)
Elbox clarifies its position : Comment 139 of 160ANN.lu
Posted by gz on 18-Nov-2002 22:01 GMT
In reply to Comment 123 (James):
>>All the people who bitch here about it have totally lost sight of the issues at hand
Firstly, I think you have lost the issues at hand. The issue was that a trusted amiga company has been selling products in return for money, which contain ILLEGAL elements to a customer who has been completely unaware of such.
Now let's take your fine analogy of the police giving a fine to someone for possession of some hash or whatever ;)
In this particular case elbox would have to be the police (the ones who first sell the illegal stuff to the customer in exchange for money) without the customer even knowing he is getting illegal stuff for his money. which do you consider a more questionable act? I ain't condoning piratism in any way, if I feel that elbox are the one's most directly responsible. There can't be no smoke without a fire first, and in this case the fire is worse than the smoke.
you also seem to be making a big fuss on capital letters about "BREAKING THE LAW!" etc. Dude, we all break the law in one form or another every day. Usually even without realising we have done so. So plz, give the extremist attitude a rest and realize that no one are condoning piratism when being mad at elbox for what they have done.
Elbox clarifies its position : Comment 140 of 160ANN.lu
Posted by Bernd Meyer on 18-Nov-2002 23:15 GMT
In reply to Comment 119 (brotheris):
"RDSK STRING REMOVED" --- that's hardly a strong statement saying "the code is gone". A cynic might even suspect that the check for the string "RDSK" has been removed and that it now trashes sector 0 regardless of whether it is an RDB or not....
Elbox clarifies its position : Comment 141 of 160ANN.lu
Posted by Jon on 19-Nov-2002 06:11 GMT
If someone able to crack their driver loses his/her RDB, he is probably able to retrieve it in a second or two.
If some novice user who loses it because of some virus or memory trashing, how could he ever know what happened? Could he repair it? Disksalv...que?
If hardware is protected too, what will it do? Destroy my Amiga?
Elbox clarifies its position : Comment 142 of 160ANN.lu
Posted by Anonymous on 19-Nov-2002 06:20 GMT
If Elbox would like to play fair game...they should *now* opensource all their drivers!
I bet this isn't possible?
Elbox clarifies its position : Comment 143 of 160ANN.lu
Posted by Anonymous on 19-Nov-2002 06:28 GMT
In reply to Comment 140 (Bernd Meyer):
Good Point.
Elbox clarifies its position : Comment 144 of 160ANN.lu
Posted by lopez on 19-Nov-2002 06:31 GMT
the new update mediator 3.5 is just a copy of pci.library with another crypting method.... so how can we check if malicious code had been removed ???
Elbox clarifies its position : Comment 145 of 160ANN.lu
Posted by Fabio Alemagna on 19-Nov-2002 07:10 GMT
In reply to Comment 144 (lopez):
> the new update mediator 3.5 is just a copy of pci.library with another crypting
> method.... so how can we check if malicious code had been removed ???
Just like before: to be run the library has to be decripted, when in memory, so just load it in memory with OpenLibrary() and use a memory monitor to disassemble/inspect it.
Elbox clarifies its position : Comment 146 of 160ANN.lu
Posted by Anonymous on 19-Nov-2002 07:36 GMT
If its ok to just add say some code which destroys your RDB if you don't do something they like, why not add some code which charges your credit card when elbox aren't makig enough profit, maybe it'll send details of your machines hardrives to elbox so they can see what software you have installed and whether it is legal.
Sorry its my computer I don't want other people using it for their purposes.
Elbox have broken the law they are criminals. Illegal code is still illegal even if the methods used to discover it could be considered illegal.
Elbox clarifies its position : Comment 147 of 160ANN.lu
Posted by Lennart Fridén on 19-Nov-2002 07:46 GMT
Bottom line is: ELBOX is violating the law in loads of countries by their "anti-piracy safeguard measures". No matter what the risks are or how the truth was unearthed, fact remains that these "well thought, thoroughly tested and carefully included" safeguards are HIGHLY ILLEGAL.
Maybe ELBOX should heed their own warning: "Whoever breaks the law...must be aware of committing an act of illegal nature." (
"LEGAL USERS ARE ALWAYS SAFE". Right, what happens if and when a buggy program happens to jump to the place in memory where the RDB-thrasing code is located? There's no need for cracked software, you just need a tiny little bug and a bit of bad luck. Hands down people, how many of you have got a backup of your RDB???
"Do not talk or listen to people who are not interested in acquiring Amiga hardware or software. These are not real users, they are puppets of other producers who cannot make their own decisions"
Excuse me? Since when did buying Amiga HW/SW equate to having a brain, and not buying Amiga HW/SW equate to not having a brain? Since I've got a tower from ELBOX you all seem to be entitled to speak with me. That's per their own definition too ;-)
No more. Elbox, there's the door!
Elbox clarifies its position : Comment 148 of 160ANN.lu
Posted by Lennart Fridén on 19-Nov-2002 07:48 GMT
"Whoever breaks the law and steals our intellectual property must be aware of committing an act of illegal nature."
LOL! A shorter reply would be "P96".
Elbox clarifies its position : Comment 149 of 160ANN.lu
Posted by Mark Smith on 19-Nov-2002 07:51 GMT
I love the bit about :
"Do not talk or listen to people who are not interested in acquiring Amiga hardware or software. These are not real users, they are puppets of other producers who cannot make their own decisions and who subdue to persuasion of their 'upperdogs.' " :-)
Nothing like a good healthy dose of paranoia!
Seriously though it's 5 minutes work to restore the RDB if you know what you are doing, and an eternity if you don't! I think Elbox make be on very shaky legal ground here, if Elbox are able to get away with this, what is to stop Mercedes putting code in the ECU of their cars that if it detects that you've had the servicing done by a not-approved dealer to cause the engine to revv to oblivion ?
I think Elbox have shot themselves (and all their customers) in the foot again.
Mark
Elbox clarifies its position : Comment 150 of 160ANN.lu
Posted by Ole-Egil on 19-Nov-2002 08:33 GMT
In reply to Comment 44 (Chris Hodges):
"Anyone tried to /only/ recover the RDB without HDToolBox overwriting the partitioning data (PART, FSHD, LSEG blocks)?"
Yes. It's impossible.
Anonymous, there are 160 items in your selection (but only 60 shown due to limitation) [1 - 50] [51 - 100] [101 - 150] [151 - 160]
Back to Top