Source code escrow is the deposit of the source code of software with a third-party escrow agent. Escrow is typically requested by a party licensing software (the licensee), to ensure...
The author examines a concept called source-code escrow-having a third party hold the source code in trust until and if certain conditions are fulfilled-which has recently been touted as a good com...
Codekeeper provides state-of-the-art software escrow solutions, to eliminate third-party risk from your business operations.
Escrow London is a multinational software escrow and source code escrow company providing robust solutions in the UK, North America, Australia and beyond.
When escrow is required, organizations should ensure that system documentation and source code are comprehensively covered.
You can still ask for source code escrow when negotiating contracts. And if a vendor is... will cost extra. Maybe it would be easier when negotiating contracts to require that software be...
Source Code Escrow Storage & Access for your IP and source code. Impartial third party, preserve your source code with an escrow agreement.
Source code deposits can be scheduled to occur as often as the application changes (most customers choose deposits to occur on a daily frequency), providing maximum business continuity protection in the event of a release. Our systems work with all the major repositories including GitHub, GitLab, Bitbucket, Beanstalk, FogBugz, Devhub and Sourceforge amongst others. Your code is downloaded into an isolated environment to ensure there are no security issues and anti-virus can be run on each piece ...
JavaScript · Python ; const cc = require('five-bells-condition') · const crypto = require('crypto') · const preimageData = crypto.randomBytes(32) · const fulfillment = new cc.PreimageSha256() · fulfillment.setPreimage(preimageData) · const condition = fulfillment.getConditionBinary().toString('hex').toUpperCase() · console.log('Condition:', condition) · // Keep secret until you want to finish the escrow · const fulfillment_hex = fulfillment.serializeBinary().toString('hex').toU...
Code, Value, Explanation ; tecAMM_ACCOUNT, 168, The transaction failed because the operation is not allowed on Automated Market Maker (AMM) accounts. ; tecAMM_UNFUNDED, 162, failed because the sender does not have enough of the specified assets to fund it. ; tecAMM_BALANCE, 163, AMMWithdraw transaction failed because either the AMM or the user does not hold enough of one of the specified assets. (For example, you tried to withdraw more than the AMM holds.) ; tecAMM_EMPTY, 166, The AMM-related transaction failed because the AMM has no assets in its pool. In this state, you can only delete the AMM or fund it with a new deposit. ; tecAMM_FAILED, 164, AMMWithdraw this could be because the sender does not have enough of the specified assets, or the transaction requested an effective price that isn't possible with the available amounts. For ; tecAMM_INVALID_TOKENS, 165, The AMM-related transaction failed due to insufficient LP Tokens or problems with rounding; for example, depositing a very small amount of assets could fail if the amount of LP Tokens to be returned rounds down to zero. ; tecAMM_NOT_EMPTY, 167, The transaction was meant to operate on an AMM with empty asset pools, but the specified AMM currently holds assets. ; tecCANT_ACCEPT_OWN_NFTOKEN_OFFER, 157, The transaction tried to accept an offer that was placed by the same account to buy or sell a ; tecCLAIM, 100, Unspecified failure, with transaction cost destroyed. ; tecCRYPTOCONDITION_ERROR, 146, EscrowFinish transaction contained a malformed or mismatched crypto-condition. ; tecDIR_FULL, 121, The transaction tried to add an object (such as a trust line, Check, Escrow, or Payment Channel) to an account's owner directory, but that account cannot own any more objects in the ledger. ; tecDUPLICATE, 149, The transaction tried to create an object (such as a ; tecDST_TAG_NEEDED, 143, destination tag , but the destination account has the ; tecEMPTY_DID, 187, DID entry with no contents. A DID must not be empty. ; tecEXPIRED, 148, The transaction tried to create an object (such as an Offer or a Check) whose provided Expiration time has already passed. ; tecFAILED_PROCESSING, 105, An unspecified error occurred when processing the transaction. ; tecFROZEN, 137, failed because one or both of the assets involved are subject to a ; tecHAS_OBLIGATIONS, 151, failed because the account to be deleted owns objects that cannot be deleted. See ; tecINSUF_RESERVE_LINE, 122, Reserves ) This error occurs when the counterparty already has a trust line in a non-default state to the sending account for the same currency. (See ; tecINSUF_RESERVE_OFFER, 123, The transaction failed because the sending account does not have enough XRP to create a new Offer. (See: ; tecINSUFF_FEE, 136, transaction cost that it specified. (In this case, the transaction processing destroys all of the sender's XRP even though that amount is lower than the specified transaction cost.) This result only occurs if the account's balance decreases ; tecINSUFFICIENT_FUNDS, 158, One of the accounts involved does not hold enough of a necessary asset. ; tecINSUFFICIENT_PAYMENT, 161, The amount specified is not enough to pay all fees involved in the transaction. For example, when trading a non-fungible token, the buy amount may not be enough to pay both the broker fee and the sell amount. ; tecINSUFFICIENT_RESERVE, 141, reserve requirement higher than the sending account's balance. ; tecINTERNAL, 144, Unspecified internal error, with transaction cost applied. This error code should not normally be returned. If you can reproduce this error, please ; tecINVARIANT_FAILED, 147, An invariant check failed when trying to execute this transaction. Added by the ; tecKILLED, 150, specified the flag and could not be filled, so it was killed. tfFillOrKill ; tecMAX_SEQUENCE_REACHED, 153, A sequence number field is already at its maximum. This includes the ; tecNEED_MASTER_KEY, 142, This transaction tried to cause changes that require the master key, such as ; tecNFTOKEN_BUY_SELL_MISMATCH, 155, attempted to match incompatible offers to buy and sell a non-fungible token. ; tecNFTOKEN_OFFER_TYPE_MISMATCH, 156, One or more of the offers specified in the transaction was not the right type of offer. (For example, a buy offer was specified in the ; tecNO_ALTERNATIVE_KEY, 130, The transaction tried to remove the only available method of ; tecNO_AUTH, 134, flag enabled, and that trust line has not been authorized. If the trust line does not exist at all, lsfRequireAuth ; tecNO_DST, 124, The account on the receiving end of the transaction does not exist. This includes Payment and TrustSet transaction types. (It could be created if it received enough XRP.) ; tecNO_DST_INSUF_XRP, 125, The account on the receiving end of the transaction does not exist, and the transaction is not sending enough XRP to create it. ; tecNO_ENTRY, 140, , but the specified object does not exist. It may have already been deleted by a previous transaction or the transaction may have an incorrect value in an ID field such as ; tecNO_ISSUER, 133, field of a currency amount does not exist. issuer ; tecNO_LINE, 135, enabled, and the account making the offer does not have a trust line for that asset. (Normally, making an offer implicitly creates a trust line if necessary, but in this case it does not bother because you cannot hold the asset without authorization.) If the trust line exists, but is not authorized, lsfRequireAuth ; tecNO_LINE_INSUF_RESERVE, 126, Reserves ) This error occurs when the counterparty does not have a trust line to this account for the same currency. (See ; tecNO_LINE_REDUNDANT, 127, The transaction failed because it tried to set a trust line to its default state, but the trust line did not exist. ; tecNO_PERMISSION, 139, Payment tried to deliver funds to an account with the "DepositAuth" flag enabled. ; tecNO_REGULAR_KEY, 131, The AccountSet transaction tried to disable the master key, but the account does not have another way to ; tecNO_SUITABLE_NFTOKEN_PAGE, 154, The transaction tried to mint or acquire a non-fungible token but the account receiving the ; tecNO_TARGET, 138, The transaction referenced an Escrow or PayChannel ledger object that doesn't exist, either because it never existed or it has already been deleted. (For example, another ; tecOBJECT_NOT_FOUND, 160, One of the objects specified by this transaction did not exist in the ledger. ; tecOVERSIZE, 145, This transaction could not be processed, because the server created an excessively large amount of ; tecOWNERS, 132, The transaction cannot succeed because the sender already owns objects in the ledger. For example, an account cannot enable the ; tecPATH_DRY, 128, paths did not have enough liquidity to send anything at all. This could mean that the source and destination accounts are not linked by ; tecPATH_PARTIAL, 101, paths did not have enough liquidity to send the full amount. ; tecTOO_SOON, 152, number that is too high. The current ledger index must be at least 256 higher than the account's sequence number. Sequence ; tecUNFUNDED, 129, The transaction failed because the account does not hold enough XRP to pay the amount in the transaction ; tecUNFUNDED_ADD, 102, DEPRECATED. ; tecUNFUNDED_PAYMENT, 104, The transaction failed because the sending account is trying to send more XRP than it holds, not counting the ; tecUNFUNDED_OFFER, 103, failed because the account creating the offer does not have any of the