[free-sklyarov] May be of interest. (fwd)

[Derek Gladding]

So, who are the "Electronic Freedom Foundation" then ?

On the case with the reply.

- Derek


-----Original Message-----
From: free-sklyarov-admin at zork.net
[mailto:free-sklyarov-admin at zork.net]On Behalf Of Pablos Kadrevis
Sent: Friday, July 27, 2001 12:45 AM
To: free-sklyarov at zork.net
Subject: [free-sklyarov] May be of interest. (fwd)



This woman got a reply from Adobe.  In case nobody has sent this to the 
list, it itemizes their position.  Also, somebody should write this woman 
back and let her know why our view differs from Adobe.  Please be nice!

pablos.
---------- Forwarded Message ----------
Date: Thursday, July 26, 2001 1:24 PM -0700
From: Linda <kat7 at kats-korner.com>
To: "nicehair at boycottadobe.com" <nicehair at boycottadobe.com>
Subject: May be of interest.


I don't quite have a complaint about your website ... in fact I did write
the people at Adobe as you suggested ... letter follows.
I did receive a letter in response and of course their story is a bit
different than what you have to say. As a citizen who does not know who is
right or who is wrong in this case ... it would be nice if the other side
of the story were printed ... if indeed it is accurate.
As a logical thinker I am wondering why the justice department is involved
in this if Adobe is not behind it all ... what else might they be hanging
on to that they think this young man has done?
Linda Porasso
--------------------------------------

1. In the case of Acrobat, when Adobe was made aware of the security
breach, we fixed the problem immediately. The Russian company did NOT
notify us prior to commercial selling their program. 2. In order to protect
all E-book authors' intellectual property (not Adobe's) we asked the
Justice Dept's help in stopping the sale of the Security Cracking Code that
compromised the ebook format. This was after our unsuccessful attempts to
work with the company first. 3. When the sale of the program stopped,
Adobe's interests were satisfied. 4. Adobe had NOTHING to do with the
arrest of Dimitry. This was a unilateral decision of the Justice Dept. We
were as surprised at the arrest as everyone else. We have no influence with
the Justice Dept as to who they prosecute under United States criminal law.
5. When White Hat security experts notify us of possible weaknesses in
security, we work with them, thank them, and fix the problems as soon as
possible.  6. We have joined the "Electronic Freedom Foundation" in calling
for the release of Dimitry.




John Warnock


To whom it may concern,





I have been using Adobe products all of my computer life.


My contact with your group whenever I had a problem was superb.





I was stunned to read that Adobe was involved in the arrest of the Russian
security expert for pointing out flaws in Adobe products.





I have long known that the watermarks on images are worthless ... not only
do they degrade the image they can be bypassed easily (I am talking about
digimark now) ... I am not sure exactly what security this young man is
talking about ... however I would think Adobe would be listen to anyone who
might have an answer to their problem.





I am joining the boycott and will not upgrade any of my software until this
matter is settled and this young man is free to go home to his family.





Sincerely,


Linda Porasso


---------- End Forwarded Message ----------


--
Pablos Kadrevis
pablos at kadrevis.com
415.420.3806
www.shmoo.com/~pablos

_______________________________________________
free-sklyarov mailing list
free-sklyarov at zork.net
http://zork.net/mailman/listinfo/free-sklyarov