- UID
- 241513
- 热情
- 1800
- 人气
- 4467
- 主题
- 26
- 帖子
- 989
- 精华
- 0
- 积分
- 3722
- 分享
- 0
- 记录
- 0
- 相册
- 0
- 好友
- 1
- 日志
- 0
- 在线时间
- 8076 小时
- 注册时间
- 2010-6-25
- 阅读权限
- 30
- 最后登录
- 2022-1-26
升级    14.8% - UID
- 241513
- 热情
- 1800
- 人气
- 4467
- 主题
- 26
- 帖子
- 989
- 精华
- 0
- 积分
- 3722
- 阅读权限
- 30
- 注册时间
- 2010-6-25
|
hfh555 发表于 2019-5-28 12:54 
哦，这就是你所谓的证据？
找一篇英文报道，上面说了华为在侵权案排在前五位，就说明了？那是不是只要被 ...
关于思科案，第三方专业人士的评估如下（摘自：Neutral Expert’s Final Source Code Report, 2004）：
From a section entitled Comparison of Cisco STRCMP and Huawei’s [CODE NAME REDACTED]:
“It must be concluded that Huawei misappropriated this code.
From a section entitled Functionality:
“Because of the many functional choices available to the Huawei developers (including three of their own routines), the fact that they made the same functional choice as Cisco would suggest access to the Cisco code even if the routines had implementation differences.”
From a section entitled Comments and White Space:
“The exactness of the comments and spacing not only indicate that Huawei has access to the Cisco code but that the Cisco code was electronically copied and inserted into [Huawei’s] [CODE NAME REDACTED].”
From a section entitled Findings:
“The nearly identical STRCMP routines are beyond coincidence. The Huawei [CODE NAME REDACTED]routine was copied from the strcmp routine in Cisco strcmp.c file.”
Finally, the Neutral Expert’s conclusion:
“Cisco’s source code has been used in Huawei’s version [CODE VERSION REDACTED] implementation of its Versatile Routing Platform. Two library files from Cisco’s Internetwork Operating System were compromised. Huawei has replaced the library code in VRP version [CODE VERSION REDACTED] but the replacement methodology was flawed and must be redone. A proper procedure will be simple and straightforward.”
这上面说的，哪一点不是事实？
|
|
发表于 2019-5-28 13:34:26
