Re: C7, encryption, and clevis

[Valeri Galtsev <galtsev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 06/08/18 15:26, m.roth@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
> Valeri Galtsev wrote:
> > On 06/08/18 13:48, m.roth@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
> > > Frank Cox wrote:
> > > > > > so if it would work, replace shortname with short and short1?
> > > >
> > > > With all of this hokey-pokey surrounding licensing and mac addresses, I
> > > > wonder if this outfit is actually still in compliance with the terms of
> > > > their license for this software, whatever it may be?
> > > >
> > > > If the software licensed to run only on Machine X and Machine X has now
> > > > been junked and replace by Machine Y,  then isn't the solution to
> > > > obtain a license for the software for Machine Y or be out-of compliance
> > > > regardless of the technical ability to spoof whatever it's looking for?
> >
> > Frank, I 100% agree with you. The only case with spoofed MAC address and
> > license that may have chance to stand in court will be if all below are
> > true:
> >
> > 1. the company issued perpetual license.
> > 2. the company does not exist
> > 3. the original hardware died (be it motherboard whose embedded NIC
> > license was locked to or network card)
> > 4. single replacement machine (meeting requirements of license;
> > sometimes it is number of CPUs/cores, memory, etc) is used to replace it
> > [imminently needing to spoof MAC address]
> > 5. fair effort was made to find and notify about the above whoever
> > inherited rights of dissolved company
> >
> > But I bet the lawyer can find flaws in what I tried to say.
>
> Both users' old workstations were at least 6 years old, maybe more. They
> got surplused (I'm the one who did that). So it's only on the two machines
> that the licenses were for. But.... I assume it was very expensive when
> they bought it.
> > On a similar note: one of the companies whose software scientists here
> > were using a lot (IDL is a product) changed hand several times, and last
> > owner changed licensing terms and stopped signing perpetual licenses.
> > With perpetual license you were able to keep upgrading software during
> > support period, usually 1 year, and keep using last version later
> > forever only you are locked to that older version. They stopped signing
> > perpetual licenses, and made it "software for rent" with 1 year rent
> > term. When that happened I recommended all our people to avoid using IDL
> > in new projects (python was my recommendation as fair replacement - just
> > what I know, not that I consider it better than other alternatives). As
> > a programmer (former I should say, as I don't put my dirty hands into
> > code lately, almost not) I wouldn't invest my time into mastering
> > something that I not necessarily will have access to at some point in a
> > future...
>
> Yeah. We have a number of folks here using R, and fewer still using Matlab.

Sounds like your former matlab users are happy with R (bad name, BTW, 
try to search...). Thanks, I will know now what to mention as 
alternative if it will be about matlab!

Valeri

>          mark
>
> _______________________________________________
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
> https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

--
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Valeri Galtsev
Sr System Administrator
Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics
Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics
University of Chicago
Phone: 773-702-4247
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos