[flagged]
If he wasn’t paid for it then what he says is true. If he was paid then it is not true.
Clearly DEFCON thinks they contracted EE to write the fimware. If that is true, and they have a contract saying that EE will deliver the firmware to them, and the firmware developer is also right that they have no contract then the problem is with EE.
The firmware dev can still sue DEFCON for distributing his copyrighted work without a license to do so. In turn DEFCON would sue EE.
Clearly there are unknowns here to us, but i don’t feel it is particularly confusing.
Lol, its literally just an easter-egg screen. If you see something that benign as malware, you may actually have some in your brain.
It’s obviously trying to insert the potential for financial fai into the software which falls well within the definition of malware. Just because the author calls it a joke doesn’t mean it’s suddenly not a serious breach of the confidence placed on them.
I don’t know if the wallet belongs to Entropic or Dmitry and he intended to forward the money to them.
That’s just a cop out and we all know it. Let’s not pretend like scammers aren’t scammers be used they might pass some money after the fact to “good causes”. If you inject a fund collecting mechanism that you control into a flow, that’s like doing a MITM attack but claiming it’s ok because you forward the traffic.
I mean, they steal your password and post it on a board as a joke. Didn't someone set up fake charging devices a few years ago to hack people's phone and gave a talk about it?
And it’s software injected for financial gain, I can’t why anyone would take issue with calling it malware. A .txt file in the source folder of a game on steam stating “donate to the devs” with a crypto address is also malware. It doesn’t have to be sophisticated to fall under the category.
Also, a non-executable text file can’t be malware because the “ware” stands for software. That’s not malware, that might be social engineering.