Perimeter
1/18/2012
05:45 PM
Robert Graham
Robert Graham
Commentary
Connect Directly
RSS
E-Mail
50%
50%

A Firsthand Piracy Experience

Limited government support of intellectual property helps, but not the strong protections in SOPA/PIPA

Much has been written about SOPA/PIPA today, but I thought I’d give a personal perspective.

Thirteen years ago, I created the “BlackICE” products: “BlackICE Guard” was the first network IPS and “BlackICE Defender” was (one of) the first personal firewalls. My ability to sell these products depended on the government’s protection of intellectual property. I experienced exactly the problems targeted by those laws.

For example, foreign sites would crack the license key and sell pirated copies of the personal firewall, whose users would then come to us for software updates and support. This is the reason for Microsoft’s “Geniune Advantage” program targeting "victims of software piracy." It doesn’t target the casual user who pirates his own copy of Windows and puts it on multiple machines. Instead, it’s copying the foreign resellers of pirated CDs selling them on the streets of Shanghai.

However, while piracy was a problem, it was also an opportunity for BlackICE. Our target market was corporations, not home users.

Corporations might pirate software in order to try it out, but eventually they have to pay for it. In one memorable incident, the CSO of a Fortune 500 company admitted to pirating a few copies of our personal firewall to test it out in his lab -- as he signed the check for 10,000 legitimate copies for the company. Indeed, most security professionals in our industry who got their start in the late 1990s pirated my software at one point or another.

So why not simply make a free trial version available, or a shareware version? Mostly, it was perception. When you give something away for free, customers expect it to be free. It’s hard convincing customers to pay for something if you are already giving it away on the Internet. Conversely, when your software becomes the most pirated software on the Internet (as BlackICE was for a time), it creates a perception of value.

The moral of this story is that, yes, we need limited government support of intellectual property. Without such support, we could never have sold any product and never would have developed it. But on the other hand, we neither needed nor wanted the strong protections in the SOPA/PIPA bills. We didn't want these laws then, and since so much cybersecurity content is created by collaboration, such laws will be damaging to our future.

Robert Graham is CEO of Errata Security.

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
Mya
50%
50%
Mya,
User Rank: Apprentice
1/19/2012 | 5:34:17 AM
re: A Firsthand Piracy Experience
Sharing about your experience in the industry and your opinion about the government for intellectual property was interesting
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Cartoon
Current Issue
Dark Reading Must Reads - September 25, 2014
Dark Reading's new Must Reads is a compendium of our best recent coverage of identity and access management. Learn about access control in the age of HTML5, how to improve authentication, why Active Directory is dead, and more.
Flash Poll
Title Partner’s Role in Perimeter Security
Title Partner’s Role in Perimeter Security
Considering how prevalent third-party attacks are, we need to ask hard questions about how partners and suppliers are safeguarding systems and data.
Video
Slideshows
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2012-5485
Published: 2014-09-30
registerConfiglet.py in Plone before 4.2.3 and 4.3 before beta 1 allows remote attackers to execute Python code via unspecified vectors, related to the admin interface.

CVE-2012-5486
Published: 2014-09-30
ZPublisher.HTTPRequest._scrubHeader in Zope 2 before 2.13.19, as used in Plone before 4.3 beta 1, allows remote attackers to inject arbitrary HTTP headers via a linefeed (LF) character.

CVE-2012-5487
Published: 2014-09-30
The sandbox whitelisting function (allowmodule.py) in Plone before 4.2.3 and 4.3 before beta 1 allows remote authenticated users with certain privileges to bypass the Python sandbox restriction and execute arbitrary Python code via vectors related to importing.

CVE-2012-5488
Published: 2014-09-30
python_scripts.py in Plone before 4.2.3 and 4.3 before beta 1 allows remote attackers to execute Python code via a crafted URL, related to createObject.

CVE-2012-5489
Published: 2014-09-30
The App.Undo.UndoSupport.get_request_var_or_attr function in Zope before 2.12.21 and 3.13.x before 2.13.11, as used in Plone before 4.2.3 and 4.3 before beta 1, allows remote authenticated users to gain access to restricted attributes via unspecified vectors.

Best of the Web
Dark Reading Radio
Archived Dark Reading Radio
In our next Dark Reading Radio broadcast, we’ll take a close look at some of the latest research and practices in application security.