It is my understanding that VirnetX already had thousands of pages of Apple source code (e.g. text documents), that VHC experts could read through, but they could not actually run anything. So at the hearing, McKool requested executable binaries of the source code so that their experts can run it, run traces, and play with it, just like Apple's experts, who are working with the real thing can do.
To reiterate: VHC already had Apple source code. They requested executable binaries of the source code and Judge Davis granted the production of the executable binaries of the source code by 5:00 PM this past Tuesday.
Also, for anyone who is interested, I looked up the MSFT transcripts where source code and Wireshark was mentioned. There are some interesting pieces that show source code is needed, but it's only one element that VHC’s experts use to prove infringement. The following summary is an excerpt where Dr. Mark Jones was being questioned by McKool. I summarize what he used to form his opinions on whether MSFT was infringing:
Day 2, Afternoon - Pages 61 – 65 (Summary):
1. He studied VirnetX patents.
2. He learned about MSFT products by studying their manuals and user guides and other information that they put on their website.
3. He looked at deposition testimony from MSFT engineers. These engineers were asked a series of questions about how the MSFT products operated and how they were designed.
4. He also looked at source code from MSFT. Source code is the language or the way of describing a program. For example, a computer programmer would write source code in a programming language, and that would ultimately become an application or software. Source code looks like a whole bunch of gibberish, with pound sign, include, alt engine dot H, and slash, slash, etc... This is programming language that would ultimately be turned into something that would - an application or an execute - a program that would execute on a computer. Dr. Jones reads and writes this on a daily basis. He looked at thousands of pages of source code from MSFT. His opinions are based on looking at the source code. The technical documents are great - but the source code is sort of the ultimate way to determine what's going on in the programs, and he used it to confirm the understandings he reached from the documents he read.
5. He looked at technical documents from MSFT. Confidential internal MSFT documents that Judge Davis ordered access to.
6. He operated the MSFT products.
With all of the information from his study of the patents and all the information that he got from MSFT, what did he do with that information he analyzed? He took that information, studied it and formed opinions. He then wrote those up in some long reports that contained the opinions, as well as the reasons for those opinions and evidence for them.
Day 2, Afternoon - Page 81 – 85 (Summary):
Q: How is it that you know that Windows XP and Vista and the other products - the other MSFT '135 products operate like this?
A: I know this from MSFT's documents, but I also know it from experiments that I've done myself….
Q: Do you have a way of showing us exactly what a hacker might see if they intercepted one of those messages going across the network?
A: I can use a tool I downloaded from the Internet called Wireshark. Wireshark is a program that can collect all the network traffic on a particular network link and store it and allow it to - and record it. It's free.
Q: And so this could be just a bored teenager who wants to see what's happening on the network?
A: Yes. Or students in my class. Basically, Wireshark understands how the packets are formatted and then can present that in a way that’s a little easier to analyze.
Wireshark allows one to collect all the network traffic on the system. For example, on Page 88, he sees an indicator that says this is a SIP TLS connection to encrypt data.
My point is, Dr. Jones used Wireshark on MSFT products, which is very similar to what dhwwork was doing in using Wireshark to analyze FaceTime - wherein he looked at traces showing elements that appear to match up with Secure DNS lookups, TLS signaling encryption, and secure encrypted links between devices directly - all elements that seem to be related to VHC patents. Wireshark may be something that VHC's expert will use again, and it is just one part of how he forms his opinion with respects to determining whether Apple is infringing.
McKool Smith and VHC experts know exactly what they need to get from Apple and other defendants in order to prove infringement. Source code, executable binary of the source code, etc... And much more.