Community

This forum isn't the best place for this post, but there really isn't an ideal forum for this, and since it relates to licensing, I thought that I would stick it here.

In the Security Overview document, at https://www.remoteutilities.com/buy/docs/security-overview.pdf , in the "An autonomous solution" section, "You never have to rely exclusively on our
infrastructure if you do not want to. Rather, you can configure it to be an entirely autonomous solution."  I wonder if this is really true, however, when it comes to pay licensing.

Even if I were to use a direct connection or a self-hosted server (and I'm doing the latter), there is still the question of how the verification of pay licensing works.  Based on the description of the "Per operator" and "Per remote PC" licensing options, it would appear that some network communication is necessary in order to adjust the count in the case that there are multiple operators on different computer systems using the same license at the same time.  And, I would tend to think that this network communication would happen through Remote Utilities infrastructure, regardless of which RU Server is used (or even if an RU server isn't used, as is the case with a direct connection), although I haven't run a packet sniffer to confirm this.  And, if it goes through Remote Utilities infrastructure, then the statement "you can configure it to be an entirely autonomous solution" isn't entirely correct.

I imagine that the statement could be true when using the free license, however.

Thanks,
AaronL

Conrad Sallian wrote:

Even if I were to use a direct connection or a self-hosted server (and I'm doing the latter), there is still the question of how the verification of pay licensing works.

Based on trust :-) We have our EULA and we expect our users to honor it.

Ah, that makes sense.  At https://www.remoteutilities.com/support/documentation/main1/item142/#license_count , it states: "For the 'per operator' license type the license count means how many users (operators) can work simultaneously from Viewers registered with this license key."  I had assumed this meant something was done to actively prevent more users than are licensed from using the same license key at the same time, but I realize now that my assumption was incorrect.

Thanks,
AaronL