Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

BluWiki Seeks iPodHash Author, Hopes for Help From EFF

timothy posted more than 5 years ago | from the have-you-seen-this-guy? dept.

Media (Apple) 77

Sam Odio, who runs the BluWiki mentioned the other day as host of the iPodHash project, has posted a followup on the legal tussle in which Apple has engaged the iPodHash project for attempting to reverse-engineer the hash used to encrypt the iTunesDB in recent iPods. He writes in that post: "I've received a flood of emails from interested individuals who want to help. Most importantly, I was contacted by Fred von Lohmann from the EFF. They're currently evaluating whether they will represent us against any potential Apple litigation. This would be great, because it will enable BluWiki to continue to host the project while working with EFF to address Apple's concerns. However, before the EFF commits to representing us against Apple, they want to speak to the author of the [iPodHash] project. I'm posting this public plea hoping that the author, or someone who knows the author, might read it." Update: 11/23 04:25 GMT by T : Due to a shortage of brain cells, I flipped the actors here as this post was originally rendered: To be clear, Sam Odio of BluWiki is seeking the person behind the iPodHash project, not the other way around. Mea culpa.

cancel ×

77 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

fp (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25861515)

daze one

I hope they win (2, Insightful)

rriven (737681) | more than 5 years ago | (#25861527)

I hope they win. I am currently avoiding iTunes like the plague it is on windows. Resource hungry and shoves new software at you all the time

Re:I hope they win (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25861551)

The other day I got a popup that asked me to update iTunes. I DIDN'T INSTALL iTUNES, apparently it came with quicktime. Fuck.

Re:I hope they win (1)

rriven (737681) | more than 5 years ago | (#25861587)

When mine broke I decided that just because of itunes i was going to look for a different brand. It seemed like it installed 10 windows services always had updates and then the whole give you Safari unless you opted out.

That was when I said no more

My brother says it is 100 times better on his Macbook Pro. So i guess it is not all bad.

Re:I hope they win (1)

corsec67 (627446) | more than 5 years ago | (#25861817)

i was going to look for a different brand

If you are looking for something like an MP3 player, an interesting one I got recently is the Slacker G2 [slacker.com] .

It doesn't interact with my Ubuntu computer at all, and only works with Windows computers for transferring songs.

But, it will automatically download songs over wifi based on stations I add to it through the Slacker.com website, and then it keeps track of what I played, what I like and don't like, and will change the songs automatically based on that. The free service has a few ads, but the ads are honestly less than on most of the "commercial free" Sirius channels. Custom channels can be made and sent to the G2 as well.

Basically they tried to replicate their internet radio experience on a handheld mp3 player, and they pretty much succeeded, with wifi required only every 30 days. (It isn't a wifi radio, it is an automatically updating mp3 player)

Re:I hope they win (3, Insightful)

lysergic.acid (845423) | more than 5 years ago | (#25862743)

that sounds pretty cool actually (and doesn't look half bad either). though i'm still waiting for public wireless internet access to gain more widespread adoption so we can start seeing true wireless internet radios. i was sorta hoping Last.fm would come out with a portable media player. they're more indie friendly, and their recommendation system and just the overall site interface are both really well designed.

in any case, Apple is really demonstrating how screwed up our legal system is, and particularly the abuse of the DMCA by corporate juggernauts like themselves. guilt and innocence don't even matter in such lopsided match ups. this kind of corporate bullying not only shows the ugly side of the legal system, but also the ugly side of Apple.

if such actions are tolerated by consumers, then we'll continue to see consumer rights being eroded to the point that we'll need the express permission of Apple/Sony/Microsoft/Nintendo/et al. just to turn on the devices we've purchased. if breaking the DMCA is the only way to create software that's interoperable with the iPod, then Apple can take their DMCA notice and shove it.

Apple has a near monopoly on PMPs, and they're now abusing their market dominance to gain an unfair monopoly on the desktop music player/media manager market as well. DMCA or no DMCA, you can't use one monopoly to muscle out your competitors in another market. this is clearly anti-competitive behavior. Apple doesn't need to publish the specifications to their proprietary hardware/software, but they shouldn't be allowed to suppress other people's attempts to reverse-engineer those specs.

Re:I hope they win (4, Insightful)

corsec67 (627446) | more than 5 years ago | (#25862895)

though i'm still waiting for public wireless internet access to gain more widespread adoption so we can start seeing true wireless internet radios.

You mean like this [amazon.com] , although the reviews seem to be poor.

There are internet clock radios, and this one [amazon.com] even has Slacker.

As for the rest of your comment: yeah. The DMCA is a bad law.

Ideally if DRM was protected by law, the consumers should be protected as well. Free replacement discs since backups aren't allowed. Guaranteed money back if the activation servers go offline, or a DRM free version. A DRM free version of the media in escrow for when(if?) the media goes into public domain. If the media is tied to a piece of hardware, free replacement if that hardware is broken or no longer functional. Free upgrades in media, like DVD to Blu-Ray, since you can't copy stuff.

And so on.

Re:I hope they win (1)

NateTech (50881) | more than 5 years ago | (#25878979)

Oh what silliness. Apple has no monopoly on PMP's at all. People just buy their stuff because they like the devices, and know about them from TV ads.

Any other wimpy little PMP manufacturer buys some airtime and gets themselves a good marketing campaign, they'd see a resulting bump in sales.

Going from "people like them and they win in the marketplace" to "monopoly" is quite a stretch. It's not like the MSFT case (which was all about pre-installed browsers, not the OS, and it's cute that no one seems to remember that), or any other anti-trust case at all.

Apple makes PMP's. People like them. Don't like them, buy someone else's. Many even have better audio quality and cleaner D-to-A chipsets than Apple's products.

Just because Aunt Tillie doesn't know how to FIND them at the store, isn't Apple's fault. Nor does it make Apple a "monopoly". Learn what the word means.

Sometimes things that LOOK like monopolies spring up when the MAJORITY of consumers want that company's product.

That doesn't make it a monopoly.

Apple would have to be actively destroying say, Creative Labs, ability to build music players. They're not.

All the DRM whiners can still buy any other music player they want.

Heck, they can even load MP3 files onto their Apple players and avoid the ITMS all together. Apple's own player will play non-DRM'ed music just as well as DRM'ed stuff. Gee. Sounds ultra-hard-core DRM-evil.

Most of the general public seems to be in that mode where they want to scream, "Let me go run and get my government mommie/daddy to do something about everything that's wrong in my life -- even though those things are by my own hand and choices. In this case, it's because I'm an uneducated clueless consumer, and I found out that I bought the wrong thing and can't take care of myself! Maybe they'll change my diaper too! Where's the EFF? They'll pay for "saving" me with funds donated for other smarter purposes, won't they?

Hint: I won't give a dime anymore to EFF now that they're in the "protect the consumer" game. The "consumer" needs to make mistakes and pay for them, in order to learn. I'm not going to pay EFF to save them from their own stupidity.

It's not like finding information on DRM is difficult these days... sheesh. Hell, the Apple LICENSE they have to click YES on uses the term right when they load iTunes. Can't be bothered to learn how it works, then too bad.

Same as the idiots who signed for bad mortgages.

Get some personal responsibility and grow up. Someone has to. Don't like Apple, don't buy their stuff. Don't call them a "monopoly" when they're just successful at business.

Re:I hope they win (1)

Goaway (82658) | more than 5 years ago | (#25865189)

Most of Apple's software for Windows is incredibly annoying and buggy compared to the OS X versions.

It's not really a very good strategy for introducing people to their platform.

Re:I hope they win (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25861953)

QuickTime Alternative [wikipedia.org]

Apple does tell you that they're going to install iTunes, by the way. Read the documentation in the future.

Re:I hope they win (1)

RiotingPacifist (1228016) | more than 5 years ago | (#25863037)

QuickTime Alternative [wikipedia.org]

Apple does tell you that they're going to install iTunes, by the way. Read the fucking popup in future.

fixed

Re:I hope they win (1)

MichaelSmith (789609) | more than 5 years ago | (#25862983)

My sister in law got Safari with iTunes. She didn't ask for it either.

Re:I hope they win (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25863837)

My sister in law got Safari with iTunes. She didn't ask for it either.

Safari isn't bundled, but Apple does include the Apple Software Update program which will helpfully tell you when new versions of Safari are released and some versions just prompted you to install them as upgrades. Ditto Apple's new 'my stuff online' program.

Some versions of Apple Software Update seem to play nice, and the one I've got installed here right now does clearly distinguish between New and Updated software but it wasn't always so.

Re:I hope they win (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25861559)

I gave away my ipod because of itunes and its crap

Re:I hope they win (1)

Walpurgiss (723989) | more than 5 years ago | (#25861751)

I always just used amarok with my ipod, havn't had any problems. But I think the windows port of amarok isn't stable yet, so not really useful for windows users.

Re:I hope they win (2, Interesting)

Nursie (632944) | more than 5 years ago | (#25861855)

Due to the stuff apple has done with the hashing of files (what this project was trying to break), Amarok now eats your music collection on the latest generation of iPods.

Or rather, after any interaction with amarok the iPod refuses to recognise the contents of its own disc.

Apple suck.

Re:I hope they win (2, Funny)

Walpurgiss (723989) | more than 5 years ago | (#25861889)

What is the latest? My sister got one of the 80GB iPod 'Classic' in January that works fine with Amarok. Is there a new generation already since then?

Or was it introduced in a firmware/software update? If it was in an update I'm sure she doesn't have it, and neither would I since we don't use iTunes in the first place.

But if that were all it is, a custom firmware that is just the original or slightly modified could be used to revert. I would think.

Re:I hope they win (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25862545)

I think he meant if you attempt to use Amarok then Itunes it messes stuff up.

Re:I hope they win (1)

AvitarX (172628) | more than 5 years ago | (#25862627)

I think there was one refresh since then.

And the problem lies specifically with the touches and the nanos.

Re:I hope they win (1)

EvilIdler (21087) | more than 5 years ago | (#25864435)

Yes, the 80GB and 160GB iPod classics have been replaced with a 120GB. But I haven't heard anything about this data-eating problem with Amarok on the previous ones, either.

Re:I hope they win (1)

Nursie (632944) | more than 5 years ago | (#25865567)

My experience was with the brand-new nanos just released a month or so back.

Don't know if the same happens with classic or touch.

Why? (1)

Darkness404 (1287218) | more than 5 years ago | (#25861691)

What I don't understand is why does Apple even have iTunes as a program. Honestly the most logical way of making an iPod would it would conform to USB mass storage device specs and could use whatever machine (OS X, Linux, Windows, BSD, etc) and have iTunes be a music store along with an optional player where the iTunes store is accessed via a web browser or via the iPod (in the case of the touch). And even then, why does Apple even care about people wanting to use the iPod without iTunes, its a small minority.

Re:Why? (2, Insightful)

larry bagina (561269) | more than 5 years ago | (#25861707)

iTunes predates the iPod.

Re:Why? (1)

Ash-Fox (726320) | more than 5 years ago | (#25862589)

Not on Windows.

Re:Why? (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25861763)

Because it makes it harder for Apple to control the user and to keep product bugs to a minimum.

By bundling all of the steps into their own products they don't have to address bugs such as:
*Internet Explorer not being secure enough to access the store
*Operating System not handling Mass Storage correctly
and other bugs that are, honestly, not their problem.

I am as much against the evil empire as anyone else, but they have their reasons for covering their butts and bundling all their eggs together. Honestly though, installing Safari is a bit over the top...

Besides, having iPods handle like USBMSD's, it's a lot harder to enforce DRM and other stupidities like that

Re:Why? (3, Insightful)

Walpurgiss (723989) | more than 5 years ago | (#25861783)

They encode the db, and rename all the files and sort them into unrecognizable folders and such to obfuscate the files.

You can enable disk mode on the ipod, and just drag and drop stuff onto it, but you can't put music on it that way for the iPod to play. They do this so you can't 'easily' (for a casual iPod user) just load up your ipod, take it to someone else's computer, and give them a copy of all your music.

Of course, this hasn't stopped anyone who really wants to do that, since free software exists to copy playlists, and tracks off of the ipod onto your pc without using iTunes exist. But it stops 'regular' iPod users from just sharing all their music everywhere.

Stopping that, is the reason that they tie your iPod to an itunes account, and why they obfuscate the music you put on the ipod with iTunes.

Other than that though, it conforms to the mass storage device.

Re:Why? (1)

peragrin (659227) | more than 5 years ago | (#25862065)

while your correct whats the difference If I carry an 8 gig SD card with me and leave the songs I want with my friends anyways?

Actually I know the difference apple isn't trying to stop that part, only to stop from being sued by stupid record labels trying to enforce an old business model on new hardware.

Re:Why? (1)

Walpurgiss (723989) | more than 5 years ago | (#25862165)

Convenience is really the only difference. To load up the SD card/flash drive/whatever that is not your iPod, requires forethought. But just dumping something from your iPod could be done spur of the moment. They can't stop the people who 'really' want to do it, only people who are like 'oh I have that song right here, take a copy' somewhere.

All their obfuscation stops is people who would only do it because it was convenient to do so. Everyone else would work around the problem.

Re:Why? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25862403)

>only to stop from being sued by stupid record
>labels trying to enforce an old business model on
>new hardware.

Is that why record labels are fighting against Apple saying that Apple's restrictions and one price fits all business model are too high? I think it is not the record labels' fault in this case.

For example: http://billboard.blogs.com/billboardpostplay/2005/08/apple_record_la.html

Re:Why? (2, Informative)

Duradin (1261418) | more than 5 years ago | (#25862565)

The way iTunes stores the songs on the iPod also makes for more efficient searches (for the iPod). Less unnecessary harddrive spinning means longer playtimes.

I'm kidding of course, Apple just wanted to piss off all the anal-retentive types that are still living in the 90's and want to name every song by hand and put each song individually into a specially crafted folder. MP3s just don't sound right without that personal touch.

Re:Why? (1)

lachlan76 (770870) | more than 5 years ago | (#25868901)

You can copy from an iPod to a computer with iTunes now. I expect it's merely so that the name is of a fixed length, allowing everything to be allocated statically.

Re:Why? (1)

Walpurgiss (723989) | more than 5 years ago | (#25869453)

The naming on the ipod does that, but it also obfuscates the contents, a positive side effect if you want to add a stumbling block to sharing out songs. It is harder to give someone a copy of an album, if the album is split up between like 100 folders, and each file has an encoded unreadable name.

You can copy from an iPod to a computer with iTunes now.

When did they add that capability? When I used to use itunes, it could only copy to the ipod from the library, and not back. It only had sync options.

And if you try to connect to another itunes library, you had to erase your ipod first or it wouldn't let you. Doing this would then make your itunes library not usable until you erase the ipod again.

If they changed that, cool. But I don't think they ever would, since that helps almost no one except people who are sharing their music collections illegaly.

I know you can enable disk use and just copy the folders full of the illegible and uselessly named files, but that is pretty ugly way to share that would take a long long time to untangle.
Without third party software interpreting the database, that is pretty worthless.

Re:Why? (2, Insightful)

PrescriptionWarning (932687) | more than 5 years ago | (#25861785)

its called control, and an obsession to keep it

but really none of this is news, its all part of how DRM is designed to make sure customers use their hardware exactly how they want them to and no other way. At the expense of sounding like a broken record, DRM simply is defective by design in that they expect people to buy these devices yet never truly own them.

Re:Why? (1)

chrb (1083577) | more than 5 years ago | (#25864019)

Yeah, Apple's DAAP [wikipedia.org] authentication still hasn't been cracked, meaning that no other media player can stream from iTunes. It used to be that Amarok, Banshee etc. could stream, but since iTunes 7 they replaced the cracked hash algorithm with some kind of public key authentication and this is no longer possible.

Re:Why? (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25862105)

I actually have to disagree. The way Apple does it is brilliant for keeping things organised on the iPod. Before getting an iPod, I had a generic MP3 player that did simply function as a USB mass storage device... and I hated it. Sure, it's possible to keep a music collection organised the old-fashioned way, but the iTunes way is easier.

Re:Why? (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25862755)

It's possible to provide the organisation features without obfuscating the files on the iPod, though.

Re:Why? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25909381)

Keeping the files on the MP3 player in a database is fine for that, but the iPod could operate as a regular mass storage device and build the database on the iPod rather than using iTunes (I believe that's what Rockbox [rockbox.org] does). Or is there something special that iTunes does?

Re:Why? (1)

Moridineas (213502) | more than 5 years ago | (#25862221)

What I don't understand is why does Apple even have iTunes as a program.

To play mp3s (originally). To be a music store. To interface with the iphone and ipod. iTunes has been around since pre-ipod and pre-OSX days. I think a lot of people don't realize this..

Honestly the most logical way of making an iPod would it would conform to USB mass storage device specs

Does it not? Do you have trouble using it this way? I used to use mine (2g? 3g? I forget) as a usb disk on my PCs...

and could use whatever machine (OS X, Linux, Windows, BSD, etc) and have iTunes be a music store along with an optional player where the iTunes store is accessed via a web browser or via the iPod (in the case of the touch).

So you want apple to split up one easy to use app into several that do the same thing. What's the point of that?

And even then, why does Apple even care about people wanting to use the iPod without iTunes, its a small minority.

Copyright concerns. Are you forgetting that Apple with the itunes store was the breakthrough app for selling mp3s? It's all about adding value to the apple brand and the ipod, and keeping itunes/ipod VERY easy to use. A task at which they succeed fairly well!

Re:Why? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25862729)

Does it not? Do you have trouble using it this way? I used to use mine (2g? 3g? I forget) as a usb disk on my PCs...

No, it does not. Try loading music onto like that.

Re:Why? (1)

Moridineas (213502) | more than 5 years ago | (#25862841)

The music dircetory is hidden, and just copying files does not update the database--true.

the ipod IS a standard USB mass storage device though--I know of no special drivers required to access it. Am I missing someething?

Re:Why? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25863045)

The new iPod Touch does not function as a mass storage device. But try telling that to the ignorant fucking Apple fanbois on this site and they will tear you a new asshole so fast you will shit blood.

Re:Why? (1)

Truekaiser (724672) | more than 5 years ago | (#25862253)

because it then won't satisfy job's control freak personality?

Re:Why? (1)

MichaelSmith (789609) | more than 5 years ago | (#25862987)

What I don't understand is why does Apple even have iTunes as a program. Honestly the most logical way of making an iPod would it would conform to USB mass storage device specs and could use whatever machine (OS X, Linux, Windows, BSD, etc) and have iTunes be a music store along with an optional player where the iTunes store is accessed via a web browser or via the iPod (in the case of the touch). And even then, why does Apple even care about people wanting to use the iPod without iTunes, its a small minority.

It is more profitable to be a monopolist.

Re:Why? (2, Insightful)

profplump (309017) | more than 5 years ago | (#25863197)

The iPod works just fine as a mass storage block device. And when you transfer media files to it I assure that it's using that interface.

But if you own more than a few hundred media files you'll quickly find that organization by folder is inefficient if not totally unmanageable, and iTunes is designed to address that issue.

It would be nice if the iPod could work both with unindexed and indexed media files -- certainly the additional flexibility and compatibility would be nice -- but it's folly to pretend that anyone with even a moderately large media collection would want to manage it simply by manually moving files and letting the dumb device build physical-storage-based playlists.

--

Now as to why Apple wants to prevent third-party programs from building indexes I have no idea. It seems like a bad plan all around -- if someone doesn't want to use iTunes after already buying and iPod I don't understand what interest Apple has in stopping them, and I think they're a-holes for even trying.

Re:Why? (1)

Briareos (21163) | more than 5 years ago | (#25863535)

But if you own more than a few hundred media files you'll quickly find that organization by folder is inefficient if not totally unmanageable, and iTunes is designed to address that issue.

I'm not sure what stuff you were smoking, but managing my ~1250 folders of albums ripped to MP3 files is very convenient, especially outside of any media player you're locked into otherwise.

And for browsing everything in those folders (and filling my iPod classic 30GB) there's always foobar2000 or Windows Explorer's search function, thankyouverymuch.

np: The Year Of - Bees Be (Slow Days)

Re:Why? (2, Insightful)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 5 years ago | (#25864069)

How do you sync copies of your music library preserving and merging the latest metadata changes? Do you use some variant of svn or git that understands ID3 tags and MPEG-4 atoms? If not, what happens when you increment the play count for a song on your portable device and give it a rating and then sync with your computer?

Re:Why? (1)

Briareos (21163) | more than 5 years ago | (#25866971)

If not, what happens when you increment the play count for a song on your portable device and give it a rating and then sync with your computer?

Simple: I don't know, as I have no need for either of those features - updating my last.fm playlist is enough for me...

But I guess those two features are still on the Requests list [www.yuo.be] ...

np: Max Tundra - My Night Out (Parallax Error Beheads You)

try this for an answer -- rental movies (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25867227)

Apple does allow third-party programs to build the indexes. XPlay http://www.mediafour.com/products/xplay/ [mediafour.com] is one such third-party program. Interestingly, while it supports moving music, photos and playlists on and off the iPod using Windows Explorer's folders interface movies seem glaringly missing.

Perhaps Apple wants only licensed third-party programs to be able to update the iPod's indexes so that they can contractually prevent the third-party products from moving rented movies off the iPods in contravention of Apple's own license with the movie companies for the same reason that Apple changed the iPod's video out to require a licensed authentication chip in all video out cables http://www.tuaw.com/2007/09/08/tv-out-locked-in-new-ipod-classic-and-nano/ [tuaw.com]

Re:Why? (2, Informative)

Goaway (82658) | more than 5 years ago | (#25865215)

Because the iPod does more than just play mp3 files off a harddrive. It keeps files organized by metadata, it does smart playlists, and it keeps track of play counts, and it syncs all that with iTunes.

Re:Why? (1)

Lars T. (470328) | more than 5 years ago | (#25868889)

What I don't understand is why does Apple even have iTunes as a program.

Maybe because they knew that people didn't want the oh-so-cumbersome "easy" way, but an actual simple way to do it. And the fact that the combo out-sold the "easy" players very soon (despite being derided by everyone and their dog) probably means they were right.

Re:Why? (1)

PipsqueakOnAP133 (761720) | more than 5 years ago | (#25880239)

The actual reason is that when the iPod was created iTunes already existed, and that the purpose of the iPod was supposed to be iTunes on the go and it was supposed to be easy.

Creating playlists on a USB mass storage device.... would not be easy.

Creating playlists on iTunes which centralizes all your personal music is pretty darn easy.

Additional reasons why include:
1) having the entire catalog of songs on an ipod indexed and ready to go makes startup time so much easier and faster.
2) having all the file names be 4 characters makes it smaller and fit into cache better. (remember, it's like, what? a 16 mhz primary CPU on the first ipod?)

There's no crazy conspiracies about lockdown and stuff. The itunes music store was years in the future when these design decisions had to be made. It's just simply better design when your focus is on the experience of using the thing. The proof is that it sold so well when almost nobody had firewire ports and so many mp3 players were usb mass storage devices.

It's me! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25861693)

I'm the author of the BlueWiki project.

Re:It's me! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25861781)

No I'm Bwian.. I mean the author of the BlueWiki Pwoject.

WHOIS info for bluwiki.org (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25861829)

Registrant Name:Sam Odio
Registrant Organization:OdioWorks, LLC
Registrant Street1:14525 SW Millikan
Registrant Street2:#39248
Registrant Street3:
Registrant City:Beaverton
Registrant State/Province:OR
Registrant Postal Code:97005
Registrant Country:US
Registrant Phone:+1.7037772727

If you want something done...

Nice try... (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25862113)

Due to a typo in the article and the /. headline, you have located the guy who wrote the article. Great job, sherlock. Now find the author of IpodHash.

Re:Nice try... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25862851)

try ipodhash@gmail.com

Just to make it clear... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25861877)

Just to eliminate one possible author, I want to make clear that I am not the author you are looking for.

- AC

Re:Just to make it clear... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25861927)

I might be the author, but I've been drunk since January, so I can't be sure.

Re:Just to make it clear... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25862145)

These aren't the droids you're looking for... you can go about your business. Move along!

Summary is wrong! BluWiki seeks iPodHash author (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25861919)

Sheash. It is so hard to RTFA now?

The iPodHash project is (was) hosted by BluWiki, and Apple's lawyers have contacted BluWiki with the takedown notice.

It's BluWiki who are looking for the iPodHash guys, because the EFF wants to help represent them.

to save you clicking through:

"Plea to the author of IpodHash:
Please contact Fred at the EFF. Fred is looking to protect your right to free speech online. But he can't do so if we don't work with him. Because Fred has expressed interest in representing both you and BluWiki, all communication is confidential and protected under the attorney-client privilege. Communication with Fred can not be released in court."

Uhh easy to find (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25861941)

http://bluwiki.com/go/BluWiki:About

"Who runs BluWiki?

Sam Odio started BluWiki (that's me!). Right now I do most of the site's maintenance & development - although more and more users are helping out. In particular, I'd like to thank Nathan, Bear, Duncan Dewar, and Chotchki. "

sam@odio.com

Nice question, the internet is hard

iPod alternatives? (0, Offtopic)

neuromanc3r (1119631) | more than 5 years ago | (#25862079)

I know that this is rather off-topic, but can anyone recommend a decent mp3-player that is similar to the ipod classic (i.e. at least 30gb storage, preferably more, not too expensive, acceptable battery) ?

My creative player died this week and I would like to replace it with something that can hold all my music files. The ipod classic really appeals to me , but the fact that apple tries to force their software upon customers makes me want to avoid their products like the plague.

So I would be really grateful if somebody could give me a pointer, I can't seem to find anything that is on par with the ipod (feature and price-wise).

Re:iPod alternatives? (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25862463)

Get a Zune.

Re:iPod alternatives? (1)

tlhIngan (30335) | more than 5 years ago | (#25862607)

I know that this is rather off-topic, but can anyone recommend a decent mp3-player that is similar to the ipod classic (i.e. at least 30gb storage, preferably more, not too expensive, acceptable battery) ?

My creative player died this week and I would like to replace it with something that can hold all my music files. The ipod classic really appeals to me , but the fact that apple tries to force their software upon customers makes me want to avoid their products like the plague.

So I would be really grateful if somebody could give me a pointer, I can't seem to find anything that is on par with the ipod (feature and price-wise).

You can try the Archos, and with the Gen5 being clearanced out to make room for the Archos 5/7, they're available cheaply. However, you'll have to put up with ads, crappy hardware, and low battery life. But you get a device that works as a mass-storage device, so no software needed. They also run Linux (but you cannot mod the firmware - they're signed).

The ads are just for Archos accessories and "plugins" (really, an unlock code). E.g., play an AAC file and it'll tell you that you have to buy the "podcast" plugin, and let you buy it instantly. Or try to do a recording and it'll say you need to buy a dock (and oh yeah, you can buy it now!). Perhaps the worse one is when you first plug it into a computer, it says you should buy the dock to charge it faster (you can disable this), and oh yeah, you can buy it now from Archos. It's gotten worse lately, so the new Archos 5/7 I've heard it's quite in-your-face - since half the options are practically disabled until you pay for the plugins. (The same goes for videos - if you want h.264 support or MPEG2.) Kind of annoying, since AAC and h.264 videos are becoming more common.

Hardware quality - well, the specs are very nice, but I hate the LCD. Buy from a place with a good return policy, because you may have to return several units to get one without a dead pixel - nothing like watching a video with one or more bright dots in your face (Archos requires 5 before you can RMA it). It's also not as nicely designed as the iPod, but the Archos 5/7 do look better.

Firmware - well, you can download the GPL package, and there are hacks so you can run normal ARM-Linux apps (including ssh), but you cannot create your own firmware and load it in (it's like a TiVo). The hacks rely on various exploits in the Archos main application (which may or may not be patched up).

Other than those faults, really, the Archos may be your best bet - lots of storage, and USB mass storage and works with anything (unlike say, the Zune, which requires Windows).

Rockbox. (1)

mikelieman (35628) | more than 5 years ago | (#25863297)

Rockbox works with OLDER ( i.e.: Used/Refurbished ) iPod hardware up until Apple started hashing their database. ( IIRC, up to ver 5.5 )

Re:iPod alternatives? (1)

neomunk (913773) | more than 5 years ago | (#25864325)

I REALLY like the Creative Zen Vision M. I know, I know, it's a 'brick', but the battery life is long, the sound quality is just fine, and it (well, MINE) holds 30GB.

Summary is wrong. (5, Informative)

lothos (10657) | more than 5 years ago | (#25862081)

Sam Odio runs BluWiki and he is seeking the author of ipodHash.

Plea to the author of IpodHash:
Please contact Fred at the EFF. Fred is looking to protect your right to free speech online. But he can't do so if we don't work with him. Because Fred has expressed interest in representing both you and BluWiki, all communication is confidential and protected under the attorney-client privilege. Communication with Fred can not be released in court.

If you do not contact Fred, and the EFF does not represent us, we will be forced to comply with all of Apple's demands. If Apple chooses to litigate against us, we will probably exhaust all funds in our defense. Out of money, BluWiki could ultimately be forced offline. This would be one more small step backwards in the fight for the right to free speech.

Fred's phone number is +1 415 436 9333 x123 and his email is fred@eff.org. You can find his PGP key here.

I sincerely hope that you contact the EFF so that we can restore this project and work with Apple in a way that does not violate BluWiki's founding principle: giving everyone the tools to express themselves online without censorship.

posted by Sam Odio at 2:06 PM

Re:Summary is wrong. (4, Interesting)

timothy (36799) | more than 5 years ago | (#25862491)

You're right, and my apologies -- I've corrected / updated the story, which will take a few minutes to update in the database. In a moment of fuzziness, I expanded on what I think is a typo in Odio's post ("However, before the EFF commits to representing us against Apple, they want to speak to the author of the BluWiki project. I'm posting this public plea hoping that the author, or someone who knows the author, might read it.") and reversed the players based on that.

timothy

Re:Summary is wrong. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25862509)

Thanks for updating!

Re:Summary is wrong. (3, Funny)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 5 years ago | (#25864081)

A Slashdot editor who actually reads Slashdot? How did you get in here?

Re:Summary is wrong. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25862773)

Info found so far about the new iPod/iPhone hash
Background

Apple added a hashing mechanism to its iTunesDB file from 6th generation iPods. This hashing mechanism was soon reverse engineered, and hence thirdparty applications were able to write to iPod classic and iPod nano 3G. With iPhone firmware upgrade 2.0, (or iPod touch 2.0 or iPhone 3G), Apple changed the hashing scheme. And here we are to reverse it yet again.

If you feel you can be helpful in this process send email to ipodhash@gmail.com

We need following kind of support

1) Reverse engineering..
2) Someone with knowledge of x86 ASM, to convert small piece of asm code to C.
3) As many iTunesDB files (from 2.0 firmware iPhone/iPod touch or iPhone 3G) as possible along with FWID/Serial number of iPod/iPhone. We will need these files for verification. Instructions for providing this information here
Obfuscation Scheme

Almost all the routines involved in the hash calculation are obfuscated. The obfuscation mechanism consist of very large switch-cases (jump tables) inside a loop. Some cryptic mathematical calculations are performed inside each case to decide the next switch. These mathematical calculations control the flow of code. Sometime function arguments are also obfuscated.

some detail about the obfuscation scheme is given here.
Hashing Algorithm

Database hash depends on SHA1 hash of the database combined with serial number of the device and some random bytes hash.

main hashing function is located at ... F6D900

Note: All offsets mentioned here are for iTunes 7.7.0.43 windows version

Note: In addition to the hash, the byte at 0x48 must be set to 2 in the iTunesDB database
I think 0x48 is lib_id It does not have to be 2(israr)

void genRandPart(unsigned char *rndPart)
{
      unsigned char rnd[12] = {0xAA,0x11,0x11,0x11,0x11,0x11,0x11,0x11,0x11,0x11,0x11,0x11};
      memcpy(rndPart,rnd,12);
}
char transformChar1(char ch)
{
      ch*= -27;
      ch-= 5;
      ch*= -121;
      ch+= 115;
      return ch;
}
void generateKey(unsigned char *hashingKey,unsigned char *serialNo ,unsigned char *rndPart)
{
      int i; //combin SerialNo and rndPart in one key, called tmpKey.
      unsigned char tmpKey[16];
      for (i=0;i8;i++)
      {
              tmpKey[i] = transformChar1(serialNo[i]);
              tmpKey[i+8] = transformChar1(rndPart[i]);
      } //encode tmpKey, to produce hashingKey.
      computeIntKey(tmpKey,hashingKey); //011481E0: I am working on it atm(israr)
} //sha-1 hash is of whole database with 8 bytes at 0x18, 20 at 0x32, 20 at 0x58, 46 at 0x72 all zeroed out
calcDBHash (u32 unk1 , u8* dbHash u32 a3 , u8 *ser_no , u32 hashlen_46 , u8*sha1,u32 a7)
{
      unsigned char rndPart[12];
      unsigned char hashingKey[16];
      genRandPart(rndPart); // 00A7F560
      generateKey(hashingKey, serialNo , rndPart);//00F60970
      finalizehash(hashingKey, dbHash + 14 , sha1, rndPart); //00F67A30 //write header? maybe version indicator.
      DBHash[0] = 1;
      DBHash[1] = 0; //write rndpart
      memcpy(DBHash+2 , rndPart,12);
}

Remember your crypto (4, Funny)

CaseyB (1105) | more than 5 years ago | (#25862581)

Sam Odio of BluWiki is seeking the person behind the iPodHash project

It is a property of every good hash implementation that it's difficult or impossible to determine the source that generated the hash.

Good luck finding him (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25862713)

I am Spartacus!!!

Hackers should stop helping Apple (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25862827)

Software that makes the iPod usable under Linux or allows you to backup your songs makes the iPod more useful and attractive. It is much better not to break the encryption, and just boycott the iPod, buy something else and encourage others to do so. Making the iPod usable means it will get more money which goes straight to the lawyers. Never buy anything which benefits the lawyers.

Re:Hackers should stop helping Apple (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25862927)

"Never buy anything which benefits the lawyers."

Good call, ima stop buying food, cause if everyone does this then farmers will go out of business, and stop making food and everyone will starve to death. that'll show them lawyers. fuck em.

Timothy you still stink (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25863027)

Timothy can't you get a real job... your posts suck.

Another solution (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25863247)

pwnplayer.com

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?