Re: [Full-disclosure] Publishing exploit code ruled illegal in France?

["class 101" <class101@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> nothing would have happened to the hacker, if he had not published his
> eye-catching stuff.

> the corporation wanted to punish this hacker because he somehow ruined
> their reputation ... and they did it successfully.

Omg and how is the reputation of ms ? oracle? phpbb ? ca ? etc .. is their
reputation so ruined ?
I'd better think their reputation is growing as soon as they quickly fix the
tool instead of to spend their customers money in court when the real things
are said ...

> now french guys will think twice before publishing eye-catching
> stuff("i'm using illegal software?", "should i hide myself?", etc) ...

"clap,clap"


Cheers to my compatriot Tena

-------------------------------------------------------------
class101
Jr. Researcher
Hat-Squad.com
-------------------------------------------------------------
----- Original Message -----
From: "Liu Die Yu" <liudieyu@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: "jean-philippe Gaulier" <jean-philippe.gaulier@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: <full-disclosure@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Friday, March 11, 2005 10:47 PM
Subject: Re: [Full-disclosure] Publishing exploit code ruled illegal in
France?


> nothing would have happened to the hacker, if he had not published his
> eye-catching stuff.
>
> the corporation wanted to punish this hacker because he somehow ruined
> their reputation ... and they did it successfully.
>
> now french guys will think twice before publishing eye-catching
> stuff("i'm using illegal software?", "should i hide myself?", etc) ...
> such fear and sense of sin is what software vendors want.
>
> jean-philippe Gaulier wrote:
>
> >On Wed, 09 Mar 2005 15:40:46 +0100
> >sec-list@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
> >
> >Hi,
> >
> >
> >
> >>in France some strange things happen:
> >>http://www.zdnet.com.au/news/security/0,2000061744,39183862,00.htm
> >>
> >>
> >
> >I disagree with this article. I'm french, I know Guillaume and don't like
> >Viguard, so I think that I could chat about that a little more.
> >
> >Guillaume was convicted not for his publication, but because he used
first
> >a "pseudo" illegal copy of tegam viguard, and disassemble not for
compatibility
> >
> >The decision of the court is defined as "really friendly" for the
researcher
> >community.
> >
> >This point of view is explained by a french lawyer there :
>
>http://maitre.eolas.free.fr/journal/index.php?2005/03/08/87-guillermito-con
damne-mais-tres-legerement
> >
> >
> >See ya.
> >_______________________________________________
> >Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
> >Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
> >Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://www.secunia.com/
> >
> >.
> >
> >
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
> Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
> Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://www.secunia.com/

_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://www.secunia.com/