"Chrome antics: did Google reverse-engineer Windows?"

[Logos]

http://arstechnica.com/security/news...e-engineer.ars

just as I said on another forum where I got the news from, if confirmed this one is really gonna hurt...

but:

Even if Google did disassemble Windows, it's rather unlikely that Microsoft would take legal action against the company for Chrome. A right to reverse engineering is widespread, and proving that Google didn't use third-party information would be nigh impossible. But should there even be any question of legality? Even if Microsoft provided the most basic documentation (the names of functions and the data they operate on), this would probably be good enough for the work Google has done in Chrome.

so, ...

[saaya]

so to sum it up, google uses undocumented api calls to make chrome more secure... which means they most likely reverse engineered windows since those calls are not publicly documented. by doing so, google violated microsofts EULA... so microsoft COULD sue google, but it probably wouldnt work as they cant prove anything... and google did what they did to imrpove security which benefits microsoft...

no big deal...

[Helmore]

Besides, this is very old news. The date of that article is 22nd of September 2008.

[flippin_waffles]

Yeah, besides, MS is always guilty until proven innocent so they have no rights.

[iddqd]

How can google violate the EULA if they're not an end-user?

[>HyperlogiK<]

There is still plenty of controversy over whether EULAs not visible before purchase can be legally binding and there is the DMCA provision which allows reverse engineering in the interests of interoperability.

'A person who has lawfully obtained the right to use a copy of a computer program may circumvent a technological measure that effectively controls access to a particular portion of that program for the sole purpose of identifying and analyzing those elements of the program that are necessary to achieve interoperability of an independently created computer program with other programs.'

[003]

Just because chrome uses undocumented api calls, there is no way to prove that they were discovered by reverse engineering Windows.

[Logos]

anyway they (Google), if they did it, did it for security purposes, so I doubt they'd be sued by MS for this. But you never know, there's so much hate between the two companies

[halo112358]

So, you realize this story is from September 2008 right? Looks like things turned out OK for the big G.

[Logos]

So, you realize this story is from September 2008 right? Looks like things turned out OK for the big G.

guys I'm absolutely sorry about that; I didn't realize that at all. It was just posted today on Avast forums, I read some of the article without checking the date. I'm going to add a reply about it there. This is ridiculous. Again, sorry

edit: and I now see the OP @ Avast said the article was old, but interesting, my bad again I missed that bit.