[RC5] eEye and d.net

Gustav_Schaffter at capgroup.com Gustav_Schaffter at capgroup.com
Tue Dec 10 14:22:57 EST 2002

I believe and sincerely hope that the reasons for dnet to keep the source
code closed is *not* to protect the project from potential attempts of
security breaches.

It is (or should be?) widely known by now that "security through obscurity"
is the worst kind of "security". It gives the owner of the product a false
sense of security which makes him/her relax on the security side, while
making the cracker curious and challenged.

Only the "good guys" (who wouldn't do any harm anyway) are kept out by
"security through obscurity". The "bad guys" are just more "proud" when the
system is cracked. Popular software is often cracked within a few days of
the latest release. (BTW, almost any modern debugger will do.)

I seem to remember having read other reasons for the closed source nature
of dnet, where the main reasons were based upon the hope of keeping abreast
of the competitors, which would normally hesitate very much to create a
public project out of reverse engineered copyrighted code.

zorbathut at uswest.net wrote:
> Out of curiosity, are there any open-source distributed computing
> out there? How did they get around the security problems?


To unsubscribe, send 'unsubscribe rc5' to majordomo at lists.distributed.net
rc5-digest subscribers replace rc5 with rc5-digest

More information about the rc5 mailing list