|
> -----Original Message----- > From: midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx / James H H Lampert > > Actually, even if one has a system that requires one to obtain an > authorization code even for a trial installation, and that has an absolute > expiration date built into the code, there's always the possibility of > defeating such a system by simply racking the system date back, unless > you've provided code to detect such activity (and also > deletion/reinstallation) through the use of what I refer to as the "muddy > pawprint" technique. > > -- > JHHL Hopefully, this doesn't occur often, if ever, on production boxes. Maybe some would go through the trouble on developer/test boxes. Muddy pawprints: If you've got someone "weasel-ey" enough to set back the system date, you're probably dealing with someone who knows how to find that hidden "pawprint" on the system. As far as detecting such activity, I'd speculate that one starts entering into the realm of security level issues and MI techniques that aren't allowed at certain security levels, but I acknowledge that this is based on hearsay and no actual experience. If one is trying to market software, sales can be lost if you force QSECOFR signon to install. By any chance does IBM absolutely log every RSTLICPGM execution that always stays on the system? If I could be assured that I could query such a log to determine whether my product has *ever* been installed, short of doing a scratch install of the OS. db
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].
Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.