Ok guys. Let's hold the panic for the moment and try to concentrate on the problem.

Starforce - we already know it's a problem for us, but we should dare to admit that it's, so far, also the strongest protection available today (and that's probably the reason of hate).

In my opinion such a sensible suspicions like backdoors and investigation related indictments should be proved by at least one serious proof, neverthless of the target. Discussed link is interesting, but not completely credible for me. I suppose the author, with all respect, is a cracker or represents competetive company (competetive to Starforce). Of course I don't say that's wrong - similar "games" were, are and will be played as long as a human race will exist. But let's concentrate on the link content.

Most of visitors won't understand the point of that message, not because of thoughtless style but, probably, because of shuffled statements. I wouldn't be so brave to call it a serious progress in fighting Starforce (come on guys, let's talk frankly, at least for a while... it's a fight) because I still can't find clean facts. Do you think I don't want? Wrong, I would like to read/hear professional statements with serious facts from both sides. Okey, they are using drivers and somewhere the problem exist, but guys, not this way. I mean don't start the battle if you can't win the war.

Someone had an interesting idea and serious technical details but, in my humble opinion, chosed the worst way to announce it. If he (let's assume "he") want to defeat Starforce, or any other protection, then he should carefully decide whom he is targetting. Who, from all the visitors, will count in the game, who has an influence on the IT games market strongh enough to decrease the software publishers usage of Starforce protection. I think the author missed his main intention. Personally I see it rather as a kind of fuzzy logic than clear and irrefutable proof.

I don't vindicate Starforce. I have my own, private opinion concerning the same subject (Starforce legality) but since I started this "exotic" thread as kind of informative only, I would like not to play "polytic games" (at least not in this thread).

Regards.