Slashdot Mirror
Domain: reversecode.com
Stories and comments across the archive that link to reversecode.com.
Comments · 12
-
Re:Aren't there laws against this?So I don't think it was a hoax, I think the guy really did it, found out that it was the worst mistake he'd ever made and is now trying to do damage control. Personally I wouldn't use any program from him, at the least he lied about the code and has proven himself untrustworthy.
I actually do think it was a hoax. Reza wanted us to believe the program would delete the home dir, but it actually does not. Blake C. blogged about this.
The real reason not to use programs from Reza is that he's not a very good programmer, as disassembly of the program proves. Also I ROTFLed at the typo in the licence that makes it total garbage.
Meanwhile you can go and see the updated official reply: he now say the program is going to be free and open sourced. It has become free effective NOW, and he posts a valid key to enable the program. It will become open after polishing the source (and he'd better do polish it or face even more shame).
-
Wait a minute.FUD or not, I'd still be concerned that the Destroy function could go awry, and might delete files it had no business touching. That could be as simple a bug as failing to check where it's logged to before it starts killing files. No kidding!! I've heard that many programs, upon installation *automatically* generate a program whose sole purpose is to eradicate the main program from your computer. If you ran this diabolical "uninstaller" program by accident, and it just started killing those files in a frenzy... well, you can imagine it would just take a small error to cause a serious catastrophe.
Seriously, the ACTUAL behavior of the program is not dangerous or unreasonable. If you used a pirated key, it wouldn't work, and you'd have to contact the developer for support.
The main problem here is that the developer thought scaring people would reduce piracy, but it has blown up in his face into huge, horrible publicity. -
Authors repsonse
from http://www.reversecode.com/
Public Letter:
I hope the public will read this entire letter.
There has been alot of confusion regarding the copy protection of the program called Display Eater.
It is described here in:
There exist two illegal cd-keys that can be used to register the program without paying for it. When Display Eater detects these keys, it would delete your home directory.
However, this is not the case in reality. The whole purpose was to create a scare campaign. You can download, the file linked from the main page, which is now down(the link is still intact here), and check it for yourself. It has been this way since 2/7/07.
It was my hope that by creating a scare campaign, I could stop wasting time writing copy protection routines to be broken over and over.
It turned out to be a mistake.
People started buying multiple keys, which I never intended, and when the protection was in place, people who did not even know they had committed piracy or what piracy was were left in the dark. Legitimate and prospective users started fearing the program, which I never imagined.
A reporter called me today, and suggested that I make it free, and or open source. I plan to do both. Once the code is cleaned up, a GPL'ed version will be released.
Since the program is free, this key will activate it, until it is released as such.
display eater
reverse@reversecode.com
PROD-9PNRM6-4RPRY-JUA5D-XW20G-J0MPY-9MTWX-2L9KW-1
-Reza -
Re:Actually... it doesn't delete your home directoI had heard about this program erasing the home directory before the slashdot story, on a torrent site. Plus the software author admits it by default on his own website.
There exists two illegal cd-keys that can be used to register the program without paying for it. When Display Eater detects these keys, it would delete your home directory. However, this is not the case in reality. The whole purpose was to create a scare campaign. You can download, the file linked from the main page, which is now down(the link is still intact here), and check it for yourself. It has been this way since 2/7/07. Please note he doesn't say what was happening before 2/7, which is a strong hint on him trying to hide the fact that prior versions did indeed erase the home directory. In addition, it's not difficult to use the Wayback Machine to get a hold of an older version of his software. -
Just a Scare Campaign (TM)uh.. maybe not so.
"However, this is not the case in reality. The whole purpose was to create a scare campaign. You can download, the file linked from the main page, which is now down(the link is still intact here), and check it for yourself. It has been this way since 2/7/07."
- from http://reversecode.com/ -
Re:Aren't there laws against this?I followed the developer link from Apple. Has anyone actually gone there? It looks like this is a hoax created to "scare" people into not pirating his program. He admits that it has backfired and actually driven away legit users. Here is the statement from his site Reversecode.com
Public Letter: I hope the public will read this entire letter. There has been alot of confusion regarding the copy protection of the program called Display Eater. It is described here in:
There exists two illegal cd-keys that can be used to register the program without paying for it. When Display Eater detects these keys, it would delete your home directory.
However, this is not the case in reality. The whole purpose was to create a scare campaign. You can download, the file linked from the main page, which is now down(the link is still intact here), and check it for yourself. It has been this way since 2/7/07.
It was my hope that by creating a scare campaign, I could stop wasting time writing copy protection routines to be broken over and over. But, I was wrong, it backfired. People started buying multiple keys, which I never intended, and in the beginning when the protection was in place, people who did not even know they had committed piracy or what piracy was were left in the dark. Legitimate users started fearing the program, which I never imagined.
A reporter called me today, and suggested that I make it free, and then have users pay for support. Or open source the program. I will consider all of these. -Reza -
Re:Aren't there laws against this?I followed the developer link from Apple. Has anyone actually gone there? It looks like this is a hoax created to "scare" people into not pirating his program. He admits that it has backfired and actually driven away legit users. Here is the statement from his site Reversecode.com
Public Letter: I hope the public will read this entire letter. There has been alot of confusion regarding the copy protection of the program called Display Eater. It is described here in:
There exists two illegal cd-keys that can be used to register the program without paying for it. When Display Eater detects these keys, it would delete your home directory.
However, this is not the case in reality. The whole purpose was to create a scare campaign. You can download, the file linked from the main page, which is now down(the link is still intact here), and check it for yourself. It has been this way since 2/7/07.
It was my hope that by creating a scare campaign, I could stop wasting time writing copy protection routines to be broken over and over. But, I was wrong, it backfired. People started buying multiple keys, which I never intended, and in the beginning when the protection was in place, people who did not even know they had committed piracy or what piracy was were left in the dark. Legitimate users started fearing the program, which I never imagined.
A reporter called me today, and suggested that I make it free, and then have users pay for support. Or open source the program. I will consider all of these. -Reza -
Re:Well, that sure backfired
And now look at the software's page and laugh at the way the guy is trying to weasel out of the shit he put himself in.
-
Looks like it back fired completely! Thank God!
http://www.reversecode.com/
The developers site has a screen up about it!
And it's completely backfired on him - nice to know. -
From the website..
Public Letter:
I hope the public will read this entire letter.
There has been alot of confusion regarding the copy protection of the program called Display Eater.
It is described here in:
There exists two illegal cd-keys that can be used to register the program without paying for it. When Display Eater detects these keys, it would delete your home directory.
However, this is not the case in reality. The whole purpose was to create a scare campaign. You can download, the file linked from the main page, which is now down(the link is still intact), and check it for yourself. It has http://reversecode.com/index.html
It was my hope that by creating a scare campaign, I could stop wasting time writing copy protection routines to be broken over and over. But, I was wrong, it backfired.
People started buying multiple keys, which I never intended, and in the beginning when the protection was in place, people who did not even know they had committed piracy or what piracy was were left in the dark. Legitimate users started fearing the program, which I never imagined.
A reporter called me today, and suggested that I make it free, and then have users pay for support. Or open source the program. I will consider all of these. -Reza -
Re:Actually... it doesn't delete your home directo
I don't know if the link has already been given in other comments, but: http://reversecode.com/
It was a "scare campaign", no user file is actually deleted (which sure does not make this decision less stupid).
Well, now, I think the original author is the one who has been most scared by this campaign ^_^; -
Evidently pirating music is OK...
Check this out... http://www.reversecode.com/movies/examplemonalisa
. mov In this example movie the user can be seen visiting a message board passing what is almost certainly an illegal copy of Johnny Cash and Trent Reznor's music. You can also see the name of an AIM/iChat buddy, "Moonlight Iris." And you can see that the person is using BitTorrent! There are also a bunch of shots with video games. How much would you like to bet that all those games are bought and paid for? Now I know that there's no guarantee that the person shooting the movie is the developer, but...I think the chances are good. What a TOOL.