Author: Rolf Tueschen
Date: 11:54:16 12/29/05
Go up one level in this thread
On December 29, 2005 at 14:35:45, Walter Faxon wrote: >On December 29, 2005 at 09:16:02, Dagh Nielsen wrote: > >>On December 29, 2005 at 07:03:52, George Tsavdaris wrote: >> >>>>>> >>>>>>2. No source is published, thus how should it be 'cloned'? >>>>>> >>>>>>Guenther >>>>> >>>>>It can be cloned if the computer of the programmer is defected by some trojan >>>>>horse so somebody can steal the source. >>>>> >>>>>Another way without trojan horse is simply stilling the computer that rybka is >>>>>developed in it. >>>>> >>>>>Uri >>>> >>>>I guess the chance that someone infects your computer with a trojan >>>>and steals Moveis source is much higher, >>>>than trying the same on Vas' development machine. >>>> >>>>Why not apply more common sense instead of inflating bandwidth >>>>with 'least probability' games, except for funny irony reasons? >>> >>> If all people were thinking with common sense, then our world would be much >>>different and to the worse side....World needs people that think different! >>> >>>> >>>>After hundreds of similar posts they are just not that funny >>>>anymore ;) It is not necessary to add all (low probability) >>>>circumstances to a Human sentence, as people agreed to use >>>>language in a more efficient way. Thus please don't add 'answers' >>>>and 'conditions' you can safely assume they know already or are >>>>simply far from significance. >>> >>>You said that since no source is available then how people can find the source? >>>And he found 2 possible ways.....That 2 ways had a non-zero chance to happen so >>>he did right to mention them.... >>> >>>> >> >>No, in this context it is not right to add inconsequential information with no >>merit but to prove formal deficiencies. It can wisely be assumed that every >>reader can judge for himself or request further information in case of any >>doubts or interest. Neglected, but formally necessary conditionary qualifiers or >>corrections are not required or desirable from a sociologic point of view unless >>the exclusion of them are feared to instill a fatal semantic misconception in >>the unprepared reader. The potential consequences of the latter must be measured >>up against the interacting population's wish for a rewarding conversation; >>outright negligible formal observations do not entail any emotional rewards for >>most readers. >> >>Addendum: >> >>(1) One notes that the abovementioned "context" is not well defined or >>unambiguous. >> >>(2) One notes that discussion of "right" and "wrong" is highly conditionary. >> >>(3) One notes that the use of the term "inconsequential" is not formally >>correct, but it may be correct when it is interpreted in a looser way based on >>observations regarding relevance. >> >>(4) One notes that "relevance" in (3) depends on the eye of the beholder. >> >>(5) One notes that the justification of the terms "no merit", "wisely", "not >>required", "desirable", "rewarding" and "wish" likewise depends heavily on the >>eye of the beholder. >> >>(6) One notes in general that the linear argumentation presented above probably >>ignores several valid objections, of both formal and horizon-widening kind. >> >>Kind regards, >>Dagh Nielsen >> >>PS. Did Hydra-Chrilly not describe here how he was able to take a peek at >>Rybka's code due to its non-encrypted state? I do not know if he was only able >>to look at some more basic form of code and not the actual "source code", and >>would be interested if somebody would explain the possible difference. > > >See this thread: > http://hornid.com/cgi-bin/ccc/topic_show.pl?pid=449046#pid449046 > >Vas wrote Rybka in C, which was compiled into object code and linked into a load >module for sale. Chrilly got hold of a copy and disassembled it using a tool >called IDA-Pro. The latter produces assembler (or assembly) code -- a symbolic >form of object code -- which, with a bit of hard work, can be understood and >reverse-engineered back into C (and there are probably tools for this also). >The major things missing are the symbolic names for the C variables, constants >and functions (the latter are usually removed with a linking option), the >structuring introduced by inline functions and macros, and of course any helpful >comments. > >Vas could have made Chrilly's task harder by encrypting the load module but >since the code has to decrypted in order to run, this is really just a >complication for a 'real' hacker. > >Of course Chrilly's actions were a violation of the terms of sale of Rybka. But >apparently many people do this. > >-Walter Hydra & Rybka this is a union not only with the names.
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.