Re: A89: U.S. Encryption Laws
[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: A89: U.S. Encryption Laws
> That's what I thought, too. That would explain why TI wants to sign all
> software: nothing stops you from copying software but software checks
> your serial number and self-destructs if it isn't right. And you can't
> modify software to accept your serial because its signed because calc
> checks signature. And TI wants to moderate signed programs so you can't
> sign your modified software.
Depending on their customer profile, they can either succeed or loose
completely. Younger members of the society tend to be low on monetary
resources but would take high risk to attaing gain, fame or just the
thrill of it. If TI's main line of customers is mostly teenagers then a
possible scenario is that someone (for a few bucks, probably) with
suitable equipment (a reasonable soldering iron :-) would disable the
HW protection (permanently or temporarily) and overwrite the signature
and checksum parts of the FLASH to anyone in the neighbourhood.
This would obviously void the warranty, however, if the cost of the
software is high enough, then that won't be a deterrent. As a secondary
effect, the unprotected calculators would merrily run all sorts of other
applications such as games and alike - this might make people do the
desexing of their calculator even if they would not otherwise pirate
software sold by TI. (Now, however, that their calc can easily install
anything, they will get that cool package from their friends...)
I do not know a single software protection scheme which was
successful. The more they protect it, the quicker the warez puppies
break the lock: dongles, key-disks, serial numbers, license managers,
you name it. It is only a question of whether customers want to get
the SW for free or willing to pay even if it's an arm and a leg.
Zoltan
Follow-Ups:
References: