NAV source to be released tonight


Recommended Posts

Not an article, but more of a comment on Twitter from the person who has the Symantec Norton AntiVirus source code from 2006.

Symantec allegedly paid the Indian hacker, who goes by the name of Yamatough $50,000 to not release the code.

416982665.PNG

https://twitter.com/#!/YamaTough/status/166835407261138944

So if this guy's right then it will get released tonight!

Link to comment
https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/1056634-nav-source-to-be-released-tonight/
Share on other sites

ha ha symantec needs thier **** shaken up. they are terrible and they continue to ignore thier legit users that spend top dollar for thier software. I've dealt with too many people with the "Yellow Plague" to know.

Err ... source code from 2006?

I'm pretty sure they have started from scratch since then ... their new AV products are nothing like they used to be.

So you think that everything was written from scratch since then? You have no idea how much legacy code is probably in there still

YOU don't know how much legacy code is in there either... could be none.. could be

I didn't attempt to say how much there is. But as a professional developer who has seen his share of source code for large systems I would be willing to bet there's a lot

I don't think it being from 2006 is inconsequential for two reasons:

1.) Not everyone has the newest version of Norton since you have to pay for the product and the service

2.) I seriously doubt there isn't any legacy programming considering that's the year Vista came out and XP still had a giant userbase

I didn't attempt to say how much there is. But as a professional developer who has seen his share of source code for large systems I would be willing to bet there's a lot

Photoshop still has legacy code.... This is why DEP goes haywire.

I'm pretty sure they have started from scratch since then ... their new AV products are nothing like they used to be.

The more things change, the more they stay the same. I'm sure the code has changed quite a bit but there's no way a program as complex as Norton has been completely re-written since 2006. I doubt the source code will be too damaging but you never know. This should be interesting.

I didn't attempt to say how much there is. But as a professional developer who has seen his share of source code for large systems I would be willing to bet there's a lot

Exactly, companies don't rewrite software for the hell of it. There are bound to be huge legacy blocks of code in Norton. Just as there is pieces of Windows 95 still present in Windows 7.

But we're both professional developers so we know this reality all to well.

Err ... source code from 2006?

I'm pretty sure they have started from scratch since then ... their new AV products are nothing like they used to be.

Looks aren't everything. Windows 7 doesn't look a lick like Windows 95, but it shares a lot of code with it as well. Of course, there have been enhancements to Norton since 2006 and there may be parts that have been eliminated or new parts started, but it isn't a throw the baby out with the bathwater rewrite I can assure you. Otherwise, there wouldn't have been a Norton release for a LONG time.

Not to mention rewrites have been historically bad ideas. Take a look at what it did to Netscape, for instance.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • This got me thinking, would you rather a self driving car prioritise protecting its passengers or everyone else? I'd choose the one that keeps me and my kids safest. At some point, these cars have to make those choices already, don't they? Wonder if we have a way to find out what way they lean.
    • The proportion (or number of iterations) has nothing to with this aspect of Copyright I am describing. In short, it doesn't matter how many times the manager tells you to change something or how. Your work product is always YOURS until and unless you then assign that to the person representing the client/company, usually for financial compensation -- either in salary or as a subcontract work for hire payment. if iterations determined copyright, then businesses would have learned to just keep making changes until they could claim they owned the copyright, without having to compensate the artist for their work. And that would be BAD. The only place where the amount of changes does have a role is in how much does a human modify a previous public domain work (from any source) before it is considered fair use or their own work, etc. For example, if a human makes substantial changes to a public domain (re: AI, by definition) work, then they can then claim that derivative work as their own...but NEVER the original version, of course. That's why anyone can make a movie about Dracula, for example, as long as it is based on the public domain novel, but not if they take new ideas from copyrighted movies made afterwards. As one of the people who personally advised the US Copyright Office on their recent ruling on these very issues, be assured that I specifically used the terminology precisely -- though I made it simple enough for laymen to understand it. If I made this confusing by doing so, I apologize. But, to be clear regarding your assumption that I would agree to your second statement that I quoted above -- the answer is NO. If AI does the work, no matter how much "direction" you give it, it cannot be copyrighted. All AI generated content is in the Public Domain and therefore the copyright cannot be assigned to ANYONE, even you -- until and unless substantial modifications are made to it BY A HUMAN BEING (yourself or a contracted artist/writer/etc.) and then that copyright on the derivative work is legally (in writing) transferred to you. This is a critical distinction. And it is important that people, especially AI sloppers, understand this. For example, YouTube is not paying AI slop generators for the copyright, etc. of their AI slop. What YouTube is doing is sharing AD REVENUE for permission to publish your AI slop. Copyright/ownership/rights never come into it. Importantly, that means that anyone can copy any AI slopware on YouTube, etc. and rehost it anywhere they want, even back on YouTube, and there is nothing legal that YouTube can do about it with regards to copyright protections, ownership, DMCA, etc. Anyone is legally free to use any AI slopware in any way they want. When this ruling was pending, I warned Disney legal of all of this before they did their OpenAI deal -- that it would literally dilute their entire IP portfolio forever. They ignored that warning for the PR and stock bump. But that is why, when the ruling came down last year, Disney quickly extricated themselves from that OpenAI deal, even eating the initial upfront fees -- followed closely by OpenAI ending their entire AI video generating business model. They adjusted their PR release dates to make this less obvious to shareholders, of course. Phew. I hope that this clears up the key distinctions for you and anyone reading. If you have any additional questions or even hypotheticals about AI and Copyright, please feel free to ask.
    • Each of the devices displayed on this page now has a little volume meter next to it to show if there is audio actively playing. About time.
    • Owing to the nature of Windows feature enablement updates, it was distributed over Windows Update services as a complete system upgrade rather than as an ordinary cumulative update
  • Recent Achievements

    • Collaborator
      ryansurfer98 went up a rank
      Collaborator
    • Week One Done
      Eurosoft10 earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      Eurosoft10 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • One Year In
      Skeet Campbell earned a badge
      One Year In
    • One Month Later
      Sharbel earned a badge
      One Month Later
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      565
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      188
    3. 3
      Michael Scrip
      79
    4. 4
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      74
    5. 5
      neufuse
      71
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!