Software Installations Normalization criteria

[LFS]

Hello Team,

During a recent review of Adobe licenses compliance, we found some installations of Adobe Connect. The Customer we are working with has not purchased licenses for this product and is not planning to do so. The Content Service normalizes Adobe Connect as a "Licensable" product (because it actually requires a license), but these seem to be "remainders" of installations coming from users who required to join meetings, not necessarily as hosts (only hosts will require a license, and atendees and copresenters won't).

The Customer wants to know:

- Is there a way to determine - from the installations information - if a product normalized as "Licensable", actually requires a license? For instance, if there is a difference between what an attendee/copresenter installs different than a meeting host in this case, or the normalization criteria is just based upon the product name?

Thanks in advance!

[dreinhardt · Accepted solution]

Hello @LFS,

I'm no an Adobe Connect export, but based on some research - the Adobe Connect can be used for hosts & guests installations. Features are based on the granted account settings (Named User Account for Host features). I agree, based on this, the attribute "Licensable" isn't the best choice. Unfortunately the normalization is currently only based on the product name (Manufacturer, ProductName, Version)

If your deployment team is able to provide two install packages (one per Guest, one per Host) with a unique package name - you could create two software models and remove the "License under management" flag for the guest package. Or normalize it as "non - licensable". It is here almost similar to the Adobe Acrobat installations, which can be distinguished only with help of the data in the swid.tag files. 

Best, Dennis

[LFS]

Thanks so much Dennis! This definitely helps! An actually helps answering another inquiry regarding Acrobat. Very much appreciated!