Not terribly surprising given Norton's recent track record (I wonder if techies hurl abuse at the man himself when he's out? :rolleyes: ), but how do you "cloak" a directory? Are they talking about messing with the file system or simply storing files in a file? :confused:
Non-norton users party up in heah
I would say it has something to do with a bit or bits that Windows looks for in the folder entry in the file index or something. I'm not quite sure how you would hide a folder and have no interest in it so I've not researched it at all.
Anyone have any possible ideas?
They are hooking kernel level API functions. This means that every time a user mode application tries to access the filesystem, it calls Norton's hooked functions. Norton could make the filesystem look like whatever it wants it to.Quote:
but how do you "cloak" a directory?
Originally Posted by Bubba
 beaten to it!
Lets not lose track of the fact that both these issues, (Norton and Sony), were well intentioned attempts to protect. The real bad guys are the ones that malliciously try to exploit these things.
I am not condoning what Symantec or Sony did, (and lets face it, there are probably others that simply haven't been caught yet and are furiously trying to remove this stuff), but lets remember, the bad guys are the hackers and the pirates.
If they weren't there, then we wouldn't need to spend a fortune on security software, or pay inflated prices for software/music/video to cover losses due to theft.
Once again, the excessive profiteerig by certain companies is another, equally condemable offence.
<fx>notices Norton subscription renewal notice still sitting in in tray</fx>
> pay inflated prices for software/music/video to cover losses due to theft.
I don't think I've seen any inflated prices due to piracy, especially not in movies or music. The prices are the same or lower than they've always been.
Thus spaketh an American. Everything is next to free in the US.Quote:
The prices are the same or lower than they've always been.
Clearly you've never been to Singapore.Quote:
Thus spaketh an American. Everything is next to free in the US.
Probably gonna get flamed for this, however, the "extra steps" they are taking seem to hurting the regular consumer more than the pirater.
I don't agree with pirating, but there are quite a few smart people out there who have questionable ethics. These people can and still do break protections all the time, there is probably a limit some day, however I wonder which it hurts more, the consumer or the pirater?
Originally Posted by adrianxw
>>Lets not lose track of the fact that both these issues, (Norton and Sony), were well intentioned attempts to protect.
Sony is attempting to protect its outdated business model. Digital information has no value once it has been released. (It has to be unencrypted to play on standard machines. At this point it can be copied.)
Markets evolve all the time and products lose their value. eg ivory, slaves, fur or whales. Old growth timber will be the next one to become illegal.
I might give Sony the benifit of the doubt except for the fact that in 2005 alone Sony was fined over US$500 million for manipulating music charts and movie reviews (to increase Sonys profits by tricking Sonys customers).
I can not get past Sony violating other peoples copyright in its attempt to protect its own. (LAME mp3 player and Apples iPod format)
Nor Sony trying to violate my privacy (XCP phones home) or break my PC.
Nor can I justify releasing an uninstall tool that only worked on the PC that requested it (not all PCs are connected to the internet), left more security holes and was only available if you allowed Sony to send your details to 3rd party marketers.
Nor Sonys other DRM that installs even if you tell it not to.
That shows Sony was not 'well intentioned' (in my opinion)
Nor do I think any DRM will stop or even slow down commercial pirates and only reduces normal users rights to fair use.
If nobody cheated, DRM would not be necessary. I was simply pointing out that the real crooks are elsewhere, and that much of what is under discussion here is attempts to stop them.