Forums
New posts
Search forums
News
Security News
Technology News
Giveaways
Giveaways, Promotions and Contests
Discounts & Deals
Reviews
Users Reviews
Video Reviews
Support
Windows Malware Removal Help & Support
Mac Malware Removal Help & Support
Mobile Malware Removal Help & Support
Blog
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Reply to thread
Menu
Install the app
Install
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
Software
Security Apps
Emsisoft
Are they leaving the Home version behind for the Enterprise version ?
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Emsisoft" data-source="post: 995255" data-attributes="member: 10447"><p>We must be able to identify devices uniquely in some or another way. Avoiding trial resets is just one reason here, but we also need a unique identifier to make sure that only authenticated devices send data to the cloud. Otherwise it would open doors for potential infiltration of data to your protection logs online. </p><p>The unique hardware identifier consists of a number of hashes of several of your hardware components' serial numbers. Which means we don't transfer any hardware specifics or serials, but only a short hash/checksum of them which can't be translated back to the original sequences that they're based on. </p><p>So far we have been unable to find other methods to uniquely link a device to a license in an even more privacy conscious way. I'm open to suggestions though.</p><p>That said, being privacy conscious doesn't automatically mean that users should be able to skip all liability for their actions and get a free pass to fool and exploit a system. E.g. if we weren't able to uniquely assign trial licenses, someone would make a simple trial resetter for sure, and potentially kill our main source of income. So there needs to be a balance that considers essential requirements of both sides I think.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Emsisoft, post: 995255, member: 10447"] We must be able to identify devices uniquely in some or another way. Avoiding trial resets is just one reason here, but we also need a unique identifier to make sure that only authenticated devices send data to the cloud. Otherwise it would open doors for potential infiltration of data to your protection logs online. The unique hardware identifier consists of a number of hashes of several of your hardware components' serial numbers. Which means we don't transfer any hardware specifics or serials, but only a short hash/checksum of them which can't be translated back to the original sequences that they're based on. So far we have been unable to find other methods to uniquely link a device to a license in an even more privacy conscious way. I'm open to suggestions though. That said, being privacy conscious doesn't automatically mean that users should be able to skip all liability for their actions and get a free pass to fool and exploit a system. E.g. if we weren't able to uniquely assign trial licenses, someone would make a simple trial resetter for sure, and potentially kill our main source of income. So there needs to be a balance that considers essential requirements of both sides I think. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Top