From giles@raj.phys.sfu.ca Wed, 3 Nov 1999 09:51:45 -0800 (PST)
Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 09:51:45 -0800 (PST)
From: Ralph Giles giles@raj.phys.sfu.ca
Subject: [Livid-dev] another (sensationalist) article in wired
Saw a link to the following article on Slashdot:
http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,1282,32263,00.html
Not much there, mostly just "the industry is shocked" spin on the dvd
crack. However, they did get a statement from the DVD forum. Perhaps we
should finish the algorithm documentation soon incase we need a cleanroom
implementation?
To quote:
The circulation through the Internet of the
illegal and inappropriate software is against
the stream of copyright protection. Toshiba,
which has led the establishment of the DVD
format and is the chair-company of the DVD
Forum, feels it is a great pity," wrote Masaki
Mikura, manager of the strategic partnership
and licensing division at Toshiba Ltd.
"In the future, the laboratories will be more
actively conducting strict surveillance and
take counter measures against illegal,
inappropriate software and hardware in the
market. Moreover, we believe that, based on
the recent legislation, legal measures and
steps will be taken by copyright holders
against such violation of intellectual
properties," Mikura wrote.
Rather bald admission of the intent of the recent copyright modification
bills the US has seen, there at the end. :/
-ralph
From alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk Wed, 3 Nov 1999 18:46:12 +0000 (GMT)
Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 18:46:12 +0000 (GMT)
From: Alan Cox alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk
Subject: [Livid-dev] another (sensationalist) article in wired
> Rather bald admission of the intent of the recent copyright modification
> bills the US has seen, there at the end. :/
One good thing about the US is that you have seem to have free speech rights
to publish "DVD exposed" in written form as a 2600 article or in Phrack or
Dr Dobbs 8)
Alan
From jfbeam@bluetopia.net Wed, 3 Nov 1999 13:59:48 -0500 (EST)
Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 13:59:48 -0500 (EST)
From: Ricky Beam jfbeam@bluetopia.net
Subject: [Livid-dev] another (sensationalist) article in wired
On Wed, 3 Nov 1999, Ralph Giles wrote:
>Not much there, mostly just "the industry is shocked" spin on the dvd
>crack. However, they did get a statement from the DVD forum. Perhaps we
>should finish the algorithm documentation soon incase we need a cleanroom
>implementation?
>
>To quote:
<snip>
Not to fuel an arguement on the list, but there is a big difference between
"copy protection", "copyright", and "copyright protection". CSS is none
of those things (and all of them as well.)
If the forum is trying to prevent illegal duplication of the DVDs then they
should know damn well that CSS is not going to stop _anything_. If any
piece of software can do CSS, then it _will_ be figured out. The only way
to maintain such a trade secret is by wiring it into the silicon of the
actual hardware where no one can get at it.
CSS is not patented. I've seen nothing officially marking CSS as anyone's
copyrighted property. Even if it were, the software (the lines of code) is
what is protected by copyright. The actual process/algo. is not protected
by copyright -- nor can it be.
When is the DVD Forum going to get their head out of their ass and see that
we are not trying to duplicate DVDs, we are simply trying to view what we've
paid good money to view. "Piracy" is a very small problem just as it has been
in the VHS tape market and the digital audio market (CD and DAT.) I don't
see anyone suing Philips out of existance for a CD to CD recorder or Go Video
for dual deck VCRs (which will duplicate tapes with Macrovision intact.)
Face it people, DVDs are _huge_. Yes, people download entire images of
CDs all the time -- the news groups are full of these things. Even with
the ever increasing size of hard drives and personal netwrok connections,
DVDs are just too damned big to be easily moved around. The average IDE
hard drive can hold about 5 DVDs and would take weeks to download. Why
would I invest the time and space to download a DVD when I can walk (yes
literally walk) to Best Buys or Walmart and buy the DVD for 10$US?
It's my opinion that the DVD Forum is trying to hold on to an at least
marginally illegal monopoly. (I'm not a lawyer nor does the forum operate
only in the US.)
--Ricky
From bsa3@cornell.edu Wed, 3 Nov 1999 15:52:31 -0500
Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 15:52:31 -0500
From: Brad Ackerman bsa3@cornell.edu
Subject: [Livid-dev] another (sensationalist) article in wired
On Wed, Nov 03, 1999 at 01:59:48PM -0500, Ricky Beam wrote:
> If the forum is trying to prevent illegal duplication of the DVDs
> then they should know damn well that CSS is not going to stop
> _anything_. If any piece of software can do CSS, then it _will_ be
> figured out. The only way to maintain such a trade secret is by
> wiring it into the silicon of the actual hardware where no one can
> get at it.
I seem to remember something about the NSA's attempts at tamper-proof
ASICs being cracked by Sandia, although I can't find the cite. In any
event, there's no way that a $100 device could possibly contain a
decryption chip expensive enough to be resistant against the efforts
of a grad student and a small university lab, let alone several PhDs
with twenty years of experience each and the resources of IBM
Microelectronics. [Just to pick one place at random where there exist
people with motive, means, and opportunity.]
I'm not sure if the studios are so dumb as to believe CVS would stop
piracy. They'd have to have the IQ of a C. elegans to believe that
region coding would convince customers to not import discs, but they
forced it on manufacturers anyhow. The only thing that's certain is
that we are not dealing with corporations whose motives, actions,
and/or plans can be logically deduced.
--
Brad Ackerman N1MNB "Conjecture has become fact,
bsa3@cornell.edu and rumour has become history."
PGP: 0x62D6B223 -- _Serial Experiments Lain_
http://skaro.pair.com/ Layer 09: "Protocol"
From springer@convergence.de 04 Nov 1999 12:53:54 +0000
Date: 04 Nov 1999 12:53:54 +0000
From: Martin Springer springer@convergence.de
Subject: [Livid-dev] another (sensationalist) article in wired
Brad Ackerman <bsa3@cornell.edu> writes:
> The only thing that's certain is that we are not dealing with corporations
> whose motives, actions, and/or plans can be logically deduced.
I think the corporations know already what will happen. They just need some time
to reorganize their companies and business models.
I found an interesting article about what they are concerned with next:
(http://www.edtn.com/story/biz/OEG19991015S0024-R)
<snip>
Hollywood wants the 5Cs to include such conditions
as "no Internet retransmission" in the DTCP
specifications so that "it would be much easier, on
a long-term [basis], to manage the situation where
everything can be connected and retransmitted
digitally, when the high-speed connection becomes
available," said a movie industry executive.
</snip>
Today they know that they did not succeed to prevent copying of DVDs. They still
believe that they can prevent transmission of movie content by defining a
"cryptographic protocol to protect audio/video entertainment from illegal
copying, interception and tampering as it traverses high-performance digital
buses such as 1394".
Tomorrow they will know that this attempt is useless as well. Then they will
present the new business models they are developing right now and still make
their money. For me this seems logically deduced.
Martin
--
Martin Springer convergence integrated media gmbh 10115 berlin
+49.30.85908840 chausseestrasse 8 germany
From andreas@andreas.org 04 Nov 1999 16:20:37 +0100
Date: 04 Nov 1999 16:20:37 +0100
From: Andreas Bogk andreas@andreas.org
Subject: [Livid-dev] another (sensationalist) article in wired
Ricky Beam < jfbeam@bluetopia.net> writes:
> piece of software can do CSS, then it _will_ be figured out. The only way
> to maintain such a trade secret is by wiring it into the silicon of the
> actual hardware where no one can get at it.
Repeated cracks of Pay TV systems have shown that even wiring
something in silicon doesn't mean no one can get it.
Andreas
--
"We should be willing to look at the source code we produce not as the
end product of a more interesting process, but as an artifact in its
own right. It should look good stuck up on the wall."
-- http://www.ftech.net/~honeyg/progstone/progstone.html
From jfbeam@bluetopia.net Thu, 4 Nov 1999 12:36:20 -0500 (EST)
Date: Thu, 4 Nov 1999 12:36:20 -0500 (EST)
From: Ricky Beam jfbeam@bluetopia.net
Subject: [Livid-dev] another (sensationalist) article in wired
On 4 Nov 1999, Andreas Bogk wrote:
>Ricky Beam <jfbeam@bluetopia.net> writes:
>> piece of software can do CSS, then it _will_ be figured out. The only way
>> to maintain such a trade secret is by wiring it into the silicon of the
>> actual hardware where no one can get at it.
>
>Repeated cracks of Pay TV systems have shown that even wiring
>something in silicon doesn't mean no one can get it.
Cable systems are (at least used to be) analog. Anyone with an o-scope can
literally see what they did to scramble it -- this was a favorite trick of
mine in high school. The cable box had ciruitry to undo the scrambling and
a processor getting data from the VBI of some channel (Time-Warner uses
ch.5 here in Raleigh, NC [*]) to tell it to turn on or off the decoder.
In the case of the Zenith boxes TWC uses in the analog system, the board(s)
are encased in tar to prevent anyone from tampering or re-engineering it.
2600 (wonderful people!) had an article some years ago with detailed
instructions on where to drill two holes in the tar and attach a paper clip
to perm. enable the decoder :-) [Digital cable is a whole other problem.]
Even though you can now see the picture, you still have no idea what's
actually in the silicon -- and you really don't need to.
--Ricky
* WRAL found this out a few years ago in the course of testing a set-top
broadcast system (some Microsoft thing.) It worked perfectly over the
air, but was nowhere to be found in the cable signal. Finally, TWC
told us they were putting the control codes in there :-( It's not like
that's easy to change. (It also means to block the comm traffic to your
box, you'd have to kill the CBS station.)
From andreas@andreas.org 04 Nov 1999 18:56:20 +0100
Date: 04 Nov 1999 18:56:20 +0100
From: Andreas Bogk andreas@andreas.org
Subject: [Livid-dev] another (sensationalist) article in wired
Ricky Beam <jfbeam@bluetopia.net> writes:
> >Repeated cracks of Pay TV systems have shown that even wiring
> >something in silicon doesn't mean no one can get it.
> Cable systems are (at least used to be) analog. Anyone with an o-scope can
> literally see what they did to scramble it -- this was a favorite trick of
> mine in high school. The cable box had ciruitry to undo the scrambling and
> a processor getting data from the VBI of some channel (Time-Warner uses
> ch.5 here in Raleigh, NC [*]) to tell it to turn on or off the decoder.
Well, I'm mainly referring to the European hacks, where a smart card
is involved which decrypts a session key transmitted in the VBI. So
most attacks on these systems involved extracting the algorighms and
keys from a smart card. Details on the techniques used can be found here:
http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~mgk25/sc99-tamper.pdf
Andreas
--
"We should be willing to look at the source code we produce not as the
end product of a more interesting process, but as an artifact in its
own right. It should look good stuck up on the wall."
-- http://www.ftech.net/~honeyg/progstone/progstone.html