🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1992Dec17.230932.16643@jarvis.csri.toronto.edu> ematias@dgp.toronto.edu (Edgar Matias) writes:
>A thread is just starting up on comp.sys.mac.programmer on the idea of
>using a computer's serial number embedded in a ROM chip as a means of
>uniquely identifying a given computer.  This could easily be used in
>a copy protection scheme.  I'm told NeXT computers work that way and
>I wonder what all of you think of this kind of copy protection?

I can tell that I was most pissed off when I had my CPU board replaced
under warrantee, and my copy of Mathematica stopped working.

>Does is work well?  Is it annoying when machine servicing is required?
>Is the chip soldered to the board?  What do you all think?

No, the aforementioned event prompted me to patch the kernel to return
the old serial number.  Is it soldered on?  I don't know.  It would be
nice if the serial number/ethernet address device was in a socket, so
that when hardware is repaired or replaced, the address can stay with
the user.  The service people don't seem to do this; or at least no in
my experience.

>I think it's a pretty good idea and could solve a lot of problems in
>the software industry.  I seem to be one of the few people in
>comp.sys.mac.programmer who thinks so.  What have been your
>experiences?

You either trust your users or not.  The approach that I like is to
give the user some piece of information that needs to be supplied to
enable the application.  This piece of information uniquely identified
the *owner* of the software.  That way, if it gets "loose", you know
who to trace it back to, and thus who violated the terms of the
software license agreement.  This is the approach that I like, and the
one that I use for the software that I write.

louie

> louie@sayshell.umd.edu (Louis A. Mamakos) writes:
>
> You either trust your users or not. The approach that I like is to
> give the user some piece of information that needs to be supplied to
> enable the application. This piece of information uniquely identified
> the *owner* of the software. That way, if it gets "loose", you know
> who to trace it back to, and thus who violated the terms of the
> software license agreement. This is the approach that I like, and the
> one that I use for the software that I write.

Well, I know for a fact that at least one of my customers has 
violated the trust.  However, I like your scheme.  Question is:
What do you do if/when you find a pirated copy?  Has it happend you
you yet?

Edgar
-- 
Edgar Matias
Input Research Group
University of Toronto
--
I speak for no one...

In article <1992Dec17.230932.16643@jarvis.csri.toronto.edu>  
ematias@dgp.toronto.edu (Edgar Matias) writes:
> 
> A thread is just starting up on comp.sys.mac.programmer on the idea of
> using a computer's serial number embedded in a ROM chip as a means of
> uniquely identifying a given computer.  This could easily be used in
> a copy protection scheme.  I'm told NeXT computers work that way and
> I wonder what all of you think of this kind of copy protection?
> 
> Does is work well?  Is it annoying when machine servicing is required?
> Is the chip soldered to the board?  What do you all think?
> 
> I think it's a pretty good idea and could solve a lot of problems in
> the software industry.  I seem to be one of the few people in
> comp.sys.mac.programmer who thinks so.  What have been your
> experiences?
> 
> Thanks,
> Edgar
> -- 
> Edgar Matias
> Input Research Group
> University of Toronto
> --
> I speak for no one...

As a system administrator as well as a developer the difficulty of maintaining  
licenses at the individual machine level is VERY annoying.  For the system  
administrator all the issues around repairs and swapping out a defective slab  
for a working one, and so on, is complicated by machine specific licenses.  For  
the developer they get all the calls from the administrator needing new  
licenses to match the musical machines being done.  The MUCH preferable  
solution is floating licenses ala OTProvide.  For those worried about stand  
alone machines copying the software: as an administrator I would prefer some  
kind of plug in key off the serial port to being tied to a motherboard serial  
number.

That is my two cents.

-- 
Michael Allen Latta
Kripalu Center
harit@kripalu.com
(413)448-3288

In article <1992Dec18.163540.21795@jarvis.csri.toronto.edu> ematias@dgp.toronto.edu (Edgar Matias) writes:

>Well, I know for a fact that at least one of my customers has 
>violated the trust.  However, I like your scheme.  Question is:
>What do you do if/when you find a pirated copy?  Has it happend you
>you yet?

The goal of the scheme that I use is to make is clear WHO was licensed
to use the software; that is to identify the owner of the "license
key" information.  The idea was that people would be less likely to
share the copy of software that they bought if it can be traced back
to them.  All you can do is make is easier for the basically
trustworthy person to abide by the terms of his license.  Given enough
effort, any of these schemes can be broken.

In the case of my software, this "license key" information is a text
file which contains in plain text the owner of the software as well as
what features of the software are enabled, and expiration dates, etc.
It is secured in such a way to make it easy to detect when the file
has been modified, so the user can't just make his own file.  Perhaps
what I should do is imbed there user's phone number, VISA card number
and other personal information in the file to make it less likely to
be shared with his buddies.

Of course, my license key file approach is a bit more unwieldy since I
have to build one for each user.  Alternatively, you can use a long
string of characters to carry some of the information such as a unique
serial number, features, and expiration.  You can then crank these out
mechanically and still have a serial number to associate with the
original user.

What do you do when you find a pirated copy?  Well, I'm not a lawyer,
and I don't play one on the net.  I do have my own personal
bloodsucker, er, lawyer that I pay good money to for advice.  So
should you if you are seriously concerned about such issues.  There
is, of course, legal recourse against the original licensee of the
software and the pirate for violating the terms of the license and for
copyright violation.  How effective is this?  It all depends how much
time, effort and money you want to expend to pursue it.

Has it happend to me yet?  I don't think this is a question I'd answer
in public.

Look, what you really need is to tie the operation of the program to
the "owner" of the program in such a way that the user has to invest
some valuable interest that he doesn't want to share.  Perhaps his
credit card number?  Perhaps his RSA private key?  Public key
cryptography and digital signatures could be just the technology to
effectively deal with this problem.

louie

In article <1992Dec19.122423.632@uunet!cbmvax!xmws!kripalu> harit@kripalu.com writes:
>In article <1992Dec17.230932.16643@jarvis.csri.toronto.edu>
>
>alone machines copying the software: as an administrator I would prefer some
>kind of plug in key off the serial port to being tied to a motherboard serial
>number.
>
>That is my two cents.

    AARRRGRG!! :-)  No serial or parallel port dongles!  They are a mess...
    a huge mess.  I have to deal with them on our IBM's and, frankly, it is
    WORSE then machine-id keys.

					-Matt

--

    Matthew Dillon		dillon@Overload.Berkeley.CA.US
    1005 Apollo Way		uunet.uu.net!overload!dillon
    Incline Village, NV. 89451	ham: KC6LVW (no mail drop)
    USA 			Sandel-Avery Engineering (702)831-8000