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!

$350 Hardware Cracks HDMI Copy Protection

Soulskill posted more than 2 years ago | from the unbreakable-is-only-motivation dept.

Encryption 161

New submitter LBeee writes "German Researchers at the Ruhr University Bochum built an FPGA board-based man-in-the-middle attack against the HDCP copy protection used in HDMI connections. After the leak of an HDCP master key in 2010, Intel proclaimed that the copy protection was still secure, as it would be too expensive to build a system that could conduct a real-time decryption of the data stream. It has now been proven that a system can be built for around $350 (€200) to do the task. However, the solution is of no great practical use for pirates. It can easily be used to burn films from Blu-ray discs, but receivers which can deliver HDTV recordings are already available — and they provide the data in compressed form. In contrast, recording directly from an HDMI port results in a large amount of data."

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

And with HDD prices these days... (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38167984)

recording directly from an HDMI port results in a large amount of data

With the high prices and todays HDDs, it makes recording from the HDMI even that much more economically unfeasible...

Re:And with HDD prices these days... (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38168004)

Because we all know once data has been uncompressed it can never be compressed again...

Re:And with HDD prices these days... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38168100)

exactry

Re:And with HDD prices these days... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38168318)

That's what she said. [youtube.com]

Re:And with HDD prices these days... (2, Insightful)

Animats (122034) | more than 2 years ago | (#38168698)

Because we all know once data has been uncompressed it can never be compressed again...

Each lossy compression/decompression cycle loses data. For examples. see YouTube.

Re:And with HDD prices these days... (5, Informative)

Anthony Mouse (1927662) | more than 2 years ago | (#38169196)

You lose data because the differences between the lossy version after decompression and the lossless version are compounded by recompression. If you have a sufficiently high quality original, even if it technically is not lossless, the differences are minimal. To the point that you won't really be able to see the difference after recompressing it.

By contrast, YouTube is particularly bad because most people start with a low quality video and then YouTube recompresses it at a low bitrate.

Re:And with HDD prices these days... (4, Interesting)

amorsen (7485) | more than 2 years ago | (#38169510)

Each lossy compression/decompression cycle loses data. For examples. see YouTube.

If you use an algorithm similar to the original compression algorithm, you do not have to lose much (in the best case, nothing at all). E.g. a part of how JPEG works is reducing the number of colours in little squares. If you decompress/recompress with JPEG at around the same quality level, the algorithm will notice that it doesn't need to eliminate very many colours in each square, because they magically have just the right number of colours already!

Similarly, most movie compressions try to detect if part of the next picture matches the previous, just shifted. After compression and decompression, those areas will stand out clearly to the algorithm and it is likely that similar parameters are chosen for the recompression. You can get unlucky that the second compression picks different I-frames than the first compression did, of course. If this kind of recompression becomes popular, someone will write a tool to guess which frames are I-frames.

Re:And with HDD prices these days... (3, Insightful)

Kjella (173770) | more than 2 years ago | (#38169034)

Not losslessly, but heh... if you can spot the difference on a BluRay recoded to BluRay size, you're *good*, I mean even the DVD9 rips look very, very close to the original.

Re:And with HDD prices these days... (5, Funny)

grub (11606) | more than 2 years ago | (#38169122)


I store all my stuff as MD5 hashes. Why keep a 4.5 GB MKV file when it can be hashed down to 16 bytes? That's just stupid. Haven't watched anything yet, waiting for the holidays.

Re:And with HDD prices these days... (5, Funny)

geminidomino (614729) | more than 2 years ago | (#38169354)

Gonna suck to be you when you find out that there's a collision between "Frosty the Snowman" and "Trans-Midget Scat Sluts XIX"

Re:And with HDD prices these days... (2)

omglolbah (731566) | more than 2 years ago | (#38170128)

You win...

Re:And with HDD prices these days... (4, Funny)

EdIII (1114411) | more than 2 years ago | (#38170220)

Trans-Midget Scat Sluts XIX

So?

Frosty was a tosser and Trans-Midget Scat Sluts jumped the shark after the 14th volume.

Re:And with HDD prices these days... (1)

furbyhater (969847) | more than 2 years ago | (#38170352)

I'd be pissed, and rightfully so, .... been looking forward to TMSS XIX since I saw the trailer.

Re:And with HDD prices these days... (4, Insightful)

cheetah (9485) | more than 2 years ago | (#38168918)

Well, this device already costs about $350... and some quick and dirty math shows that an HDMI video stream is about 1.78 TB an hour. It's a lot of data, but the bigger problem is not the storage but the rate at which the data is coming out of the capture device. it's about 500MB/sec and to actually write at that data rate, your going to need quite a few hard drives to keep up. You are really going to need at least 6 drives at a minimum to be able to record at this data rate(without problems). So the amount of data is likely to fit on what ever array your recording the HDMI stream onto.

My 8-disk array could handle this right now... granted it wasn't a low cost array(machine + disks for ~$1000) and it would be even more costly with current HDD prices. But people do have access to the disk space and speed needed to do this currently. I think you would find that a lot of the people the would think about ripping video directly from HDMI already have the data storage requirements taken care of.

Re:And with HDD prices these days... (3, Informative)

Guspaz (556486) | more than 2 years ago | (#38169358)

You can do it with two SATA3 SSDs, although three is safe. But three sufficiently large SSDs aren't cheap. Then again, nobody said you had to rip it all in one go. Three small SSDs; rip a chunk, copy it to a slow big drive, rip another chunk, slow big drive. Regardless, the real reason that it's not useful for pirates is because it's rare that a pirate would even want to do this. bluray was thoroughly cracked ages ago, and OTA or satellite broadcasts (or itunes downloads) are probably going to have better quality than any streaming service you might want to rip.

What I don't get is why this is even news. Devices to strip HDCP have been on the market for years; the hdfury people have a whole product lineup for stripping HDCP and converting to various analog formats, or even hdmi-to-hdmi (the "dr hdmi" product, I believe). Is this news because it's now DIY, rather than a commercial product that does it? I assume there are other similar devices on the market.

Re:And with HDD prices these days... (1)

EdZ (755139) | more than 2 years ago | (#38169366)

Existing HDMI Capture cards (e.g. £130 Blackmagic) seem to handle on-the-fly compression pretty well. If you really want to capture full-rate HDMI, it might be a lot cheaper to use two 512gb SSDs in RAID0 than a larger and probably more expensive HDD array.

Re:And with HDD prices these days... (1)

tibit (1762298) | more than 2 years ago | (#38169490)

It's a matter of time now until someone gets a larger FPGA and puts the HDMI decryptor on it and, say, 6 or 8 SATA interfaces. That way you'd easily stream the data to hard drives, all on one compact board. This can be had on a board that's still probably under $500. The next step will be to put a video compressor on said larger FPGA, and leisurely push the data over a USB 2 connection...

Re:And with HDD prices these days... (1)

Kjella (173770) | more than 2 years ago | (#38169606)

Yes, but you get about 3:1 lossless compression extremely cheaply, which means a much simpler storage solution will do. I'm actually aware of a person who did this before anyone managed to break AACS, it took a HDCP decrypter, a HDMI capture card - very rare indeed - and a fast RAID solution, but it was done like 2007. Today there's not much point but it could be done years ago already.

vapid nonsense (5, Insightful)

sribe (304414) | more than 2 years ago | (#38168060)

...it would be too expensive to build a system that could conduct a real-time decryption of the data stream.

Then how, exactly, is anyone supposed to be able to ever watch? Oh, yeah, right. Duh. Every freaking HDTV with HDMI input has to conduct real-time decryption of the data stream. Where do these companies even find these fucktard spokespeople???

Re:vapid nonsense (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38168150)

...it would be too expensive to build a system that could conduct a real-time decryption of the data stream.

Then how, exactly, is anyone supposed to be able to ever watch? Oh, yeah, right. Duh. Every freaking HDTV with HDMI input has to conduct real-time decryption of the data stream. Where do these companies even find these fucktard spokespeople???

http://funnyphones.net/?p=686

Re:vapid nonsense (1)

westlake (615356) | more than 2 years ago | (#38168330)

Then how, exactly, is anyone supposed to be able to ever watch? Oh, yeah, right. Duh. Every freaking HDTV with HDMI input has to conduct real-time decryption of the data stream.

The price quoted to LG, Samsung, Mitsubishi, Panasonic, Sony, Toshiba, Vizio, et al., assuming they do not have the manufacturing capacity themselves, is not what you pay when you are a lone cellar-dwelling geek.

Re:vapid nonsense (4, Insightful)

sjames (1099) | more than 2 years ago | (#38168992)

Of course, none of those will ever be diverted into the hobbiest market or salvaged out of broken and obsolete hardware.

Certainly, no inexpensive Chinese manufacturer would ever sell such a thing on the gray market, that would be disrespectful of IP!

Re:vapid nonsense (5, Funny)

pckl300 (1525891) | more than 2 years ago | (#38168412)

Then how, exactly, is anyone supposed to be able to ever watch?

Isn't the whole point of DRM to prevent you from watching anything?

Re:vapid nonsense (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38169124)

Isn't the whole point of DRM to prevent you from watching anything?

I was going to say something like, "no, the point of DRM is to make you pay for the same content multiple times", but I decided to just give up and declare that you win the thread. Congratulations!

Re:vapid nonsense (2)

TheGratefulNet (143330) | more than 2 years ago | (#38169044)

BIG diff between on the fly decryption and display vs saving ALL that overly large data to disk. without spilling. ever.

huge difference, there, mate.

cue the:

"won't someone PLEASE think of the disks!?!?"

meme...

Re:vapid nonsense (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38169176)

What that statement meant was that it would be too expensive/risky for anyone outside the HDMI cartel to build such a device. It's still wrong, but less so.

It's a great thing for professional AV folk (5, Insightful)

Mononoke (88668) | more than 2 years ago | (#38168066)

Maybe this will finally make HDMI manageable for audio/visual crews when faced with multiple HDCP encumbered HDMI sources that need to switched and/or crossfaded in real time. Right now it is damn near impossible to implement any form of HDMI switching due to the ridiculous handshake times needed when protected HDMI sources see changes in the destination. Currently the only way to handle it is with a black market HDMI to component converter which introduces often unacceptable video delays in addition to requiring multiple Digital-to-Analog and Analog-to-Digital transitions along the way.

Re:It's a great thing for professional AV folk (3, Interesting)

johanwanderer (1078391) | more than 2 years ago | (#38168194)

Since this is only a man-in-the-middle attack, it still requires an appropriate HDCP end point for each source, basically doubling the amount of gears they need to carry.

Re:It's a great thing for professional AV folk (0, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38168298)

Why would pros touch it in the first place?
HDMI is for end-user suckers.

Re:It's a great thing for professional AV folk (1)

billcopc (196330) | more than 2 years ago | (#38168300)

That's nonsense, if you have a switch that integrates two or more HDCP endpoints, there is nothing preventing you from mixing the decoded signals thereafter. The problem is a legal one, not technical. There just aren't enough HDCP-enabled pro devices on the market, because the consortium is excessively protective of its stupid-ass DRM scheme.

Re:It's a great thing for professional AV folk (2)

Mononoke (88668) | more than 2 years ago | (#38168572)

There just aren't enough HDCP-enabled pro devices on the market, because the consortium is excessively protective of its stupid-ass DRM scheme.

No, it's because the DRM scheme requires the HDCP all the way to the end device (projector or monitor). In the real world we're not using HDMI inputs on projectors because of cable length issues (among other things.) There is no practical way to get HDCP encumbered HDMI switched and then distributed amongst multiple projectors and confidence monitors in the typical corporate meeting environment.

Re:It's a great thing for professional AV folk (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38168392)

If you're a professional you'll be routing and mixing hd-sdi

Re:It's a great thing for professional AV folk (2)

Guspaz (556486) | more than 2 years ago | (#38169644)

hd-sdi is awesome (why are BNC connectors so damned rare these days? A connector that quickly and securely locks beats RCA or HDMI any day), but unless you've got pro-grade projectors, you're not going to have hd-sdi input on them. Even semi-pro multi-lamp projectors are lacking it. So you end up having to use hd-sdi to hdmi adapters, which work great, but cost a fortune. Not that an hd-sdi mixer doesn't already cost a fortune, although those can often be rented at somewhat reasonable prices, unlike projectors. I rented a Roland V1600-HD for three days for 7% of replacement cost, but projector rentals seem to be up to 25-50% for a three day rental, it's insane.

Yeah, if you've got the budget, it doesn't really matter, but sometimes you need to do pro-grade stuff with a small budget (perhaps because the people holding the purse strings don't want to give you enough money to do it right), and the rental price disparities become an obstacle.

Re:It's a great thing for professional AV folk (3, Informative)

DreadPiratePizz (803402) | more than 2 years ago | (#38168522)

First of all, professional A/V folk don't use HDMI anyway. Cameras and decks all have SDI outputs, which is pretty much the standard, and there's no copy protection on it. Second of all, in the chance you do use an HDMI source, not a single camera or deck is ever going to set HDCP on, since well, you're the one shooting and editing the material. Copy protection is only an issue if you are trying to record off a PS3, TV broadcast, or copy a blu ray disc - i.e. something that's not yours. If you're running into copy protection issues, you need to get proper gear.

Re:It's a great thing for professional AV folk (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38168604)

Obviously you have never done pro a/v, or you'd realize that clients come in at the last minute expecting you to be able to play back anything they their at you...if it happens to be a protected bluray or something, this would be good to have

Re:It's a great thing for professional AV folk (1, Flamebait)

Mononoke (88668) | more than 2 years ago | (#38168650)

That's funny, because I often legally project source material from commercial HDCP-protected BD-DVD sources. I do have the proper gear for this task. What I don't have is a graceful way to switch between pre-show PPT sources and the BD-DVD sources. You may live in a sandbox where HD-SDI is the standard, but most of us are still working with multiple clients in multiple venues where media distribution methods are far from standardized. "Cameras and decks all have..." was my first clue of that.

Re:It's a great thing for professional AV folk (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38169164)

Maybe you should look at the NeTV (http://wiki.chumby.com/index.php/What_is_NeTV), it's a small device which can overlay custom graphic/UI ontop of a encrypted signal (without decoding it).

It might be possible to overlay motion video in the same manner, so you can mix in your 'unprotected' stuff before the main feature.

Re:It's a great thing for professional AV folk (1)

Guspaz (556486) | more than 2 years ago | (#38169700)

What about existing HDCP strippers? They've been on the market for years.

Re:It's a great thing for professional AV folk (1)

wagnerrp (1305589) | more than 2 years ago | (#38170148)

And as soon as they pop up, they get invalidated by newer hardware and newer media. HDMI/HDCP has the ability to push out key revocation to existing hardware and spread to other connected devices.

Re:It's a great thing for professional AV folk (2)

Guspaz (556486) | more than 2 years ago | (#38170400)

I've read elsewhere that HDCP strippers are typically made from the chips pulled from displays themselves (perhaps they're desoldering them from broken displays). If this is the case, wouldn't HDCP revocations be rendering many random displays useless? Unlike on a BluRay player, there's no way to update the HDCP key on devices that tend not to have updatable firmware (like displays or TVs).

Re:It's a great thing for professional AV folk (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38170094)

I have a small A/V company (10 employees) and we fairly often get clients bringing in a bluray disc that they have made themselves and expect us to show with 10 minutes notice. Even though it is all material that they have shot and edited, the hdcp issues still usually bite us. We didn't think that this would be a problem for self made discs, but experience has shown that it usually is. We now tell clients that we can only accept video files or standard def dvd's.

While the parent poster suggests that this is only a problem when pirating material, I can tell you for a fact that it happens all the time to non copyrighted material. I don't know if clients simply don't create the discs correctly or if the bluray players just assume that hdcp should be applied and cause a fail when connected to switching gear no matter what the content. Either way, it kills us on site.

We do everything hdsdi, but occasionally still convert our output to hdmi for some of our older projectors. This is done at each projector because of issues with long runs of hdmi cable. Blackmagic has converters that only cost 4 or 5 hundred bucks and work fine. While hdmi is nice for your tv at home it is a terrible thing in pro applications. I really wish manufacturers would get off the bandwagon and make pro gear pro and amateur gear amateur.

Hell I might build one for home (4, Interesting)

Sycraft-fu (314770) | more than 2 years ago | (#38168588)

Right now I have a situation where I can't watch Blu-rays on my PC. I have everything you should need, an ideal setup even. I have a high end video card that does HDCP, I have Windows 7, I have a monitor that does HDCP, and I have a receiver that does HDCP. Everything works, looks, and sounds, great. However when I play a Blu-ray, it says "Nope."

Why?

Well because of the way my video and audio are hooked up. My graphics card is hooked directly via DVI to my monitor. No problems there. However it then has a second HDMI output to an HDMI soundcard, which goes HDMI to my receiver. The reason is HDMI requires a video clock to send sound and the soundcard doesn't generate one. No problem, the second out is just a mirrored output, just a dummy out to get video clock.

However Blu-ray doesn't allow for that. No splitting the signal. Even though both devices are HDCP enabled, it won't allow it.

So hell, I might build one of these (particularly since where I work, we have Xilinx ISE). Would solve the problem and mean any future HDCP problems are easy to solve too.

You then need to say sod it (0)

fireylord (1074571) | more than 2 years ago | (#38168946)

And rip the bluerays.

Re:Hell I might build one for home (1)

vux984 (928602) | more than 2 years ago | (#38168998)

Right now I have a situation where I can't watch Blu-rays on my PC. I have everything you should need, an ideal setup even

My PC has HDMI out of the video card to the receiver, the receiver has HDMI up to the display. Bluray playback works just fine.

Your setup sounds needlessly convoluted for no good reason.

Three main reasons (4, Informative)

Sycraft-fu (314770) | more than 2 years ago | (#38169136)

1) My monitor is a professional display (an NEC MultiSync 2690WUXi). Among its other features is hardware calibration. It has internal correction tables to produce extremely accurate output, calibrated to any curves I like. To do that, the video card must be able to communicate with it via DDC/CI which it can't do through the receiver, since the receiver gets those commands, not the monitor. I didn't pay $1200 for a monitor and calibration hardware to not have it work to its optimum potential.

2) Latency. I am a gamer, and I want as low a latency as I can have to my monitor, particularly since as a professional monitor its scaler already introduces a bit of latency (33ms). If I feed the signal through my receiver, it will introduce additional latency in an effort to perfectly synchronize audio and video. I would rather have less latency and a minor sync problem.

3) I often operate the computer without sound. Right now, since I'm surfing the web, I don't feel the need to listen to anything. Thus the receiver is off. It puts out about 200 watts at idle since it is a fairly high power, high bias unit (a Denon 3808CI if you are wondering). I'd rather save the power, and more importantly not heat up my room, when it isn't needed. Can't do that if I feed video through it.

My setup is designed to meet my needs, and it does very well. It has no issues with anything, except for Blu-ray. The only reason it has such an issue is a stupid artificial restriction.

Re:Three main reasons (1)

vux984 (928602) | more than 2 years ago | (#38169820)

1) My monitor is a professional display (an NEC MultiSync 2690WUXi). Among its other features is hardware calibration. It has internal correction tables to produce extremely accurate output, calibrated to any curves I like. To do that, the video card must be able to communicate with it via DDC/CI which it can't do through the receiver, since the receiver gets those commands, not the monitor. I didn't pay $1200 for a monitor and calibration hardware to not have it work to its optimum potential.

Hmmm.

2) Latency. I am a gamer, and I want as low a latency as I can have to my monitor, particularly since as a professional monitor its scaler already introduces a bit of latency (33ms). If I feed the signal through my receiver, it will introduce additional latency in an effort to perfectly synchronize audio and video. I would rather have less latency and a minor sync problem.

I'm also a gamer, and the receiver introduces no discernible lag, provided everything is set to straight passthru with no extra processing "i.e. game mode" on both the display and receiver.

3) I often operate the computer without sound. Right now, since I'm surfing the web, I don't feel the need to listen to anything. Thus the receiver is off. It puts out about 200 watts at idle since it is a fairly high power, high bias unit (a Denon 3808CI if you are wondering). I'd rather save the power, and more importantly not heat up my room, when it isn't needed. Can't do that if I feed video through it.

My receiver passes hdmi up to the display in standby drawing minimal power just fine.

This loops back around to #1... maybe your hdmi passthru issue with DDC/CI can be resolved via a configuration option on the reciever? Denon makes good kit after all... although i imagine you've already chased that rabbit down into its rabbit hole as far as you could...

Re:Three main reasons (1)

aintnostranger (1811098) | more than 2 years ago | (#38170442)

This loops back around to #1... maybe your hdmi passthru issue with DDC/CI can be resolved via a configuration option on the reciever? Denon makes good kit after all... although i imagine you've already chased that rabbit down into its rabbit hole as far as you could...

And this is how HDMI and all DRM is a bad thing... because it puts the burden of making HIS expensive equipment on the consumer. The consumer pays for the hardware, for the media, for the DRM development costs... and still he is the one that gets screwed with less functionality than we had in the 80s.

Re:Three main reasons (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38170440)

1) My monitor is a professional display (an NEC MultiSync 2690WUXi). Among its other features is hardware calibration. It has internal correction tables to produce extremely accurate output, calibrated to any curves I like. To do that, the video card must be able to communicate with it via DDC/CI which it can't do through the receiver, since the receiver gets those commands, not the monitor. I didn't pay $1200 for a monitor and calibration hardware to not have it work to its optimum potential.

2) Latency. I am a gamer, and I want as low a latency as I can have to my monitor, particularly since as a professional monitor its scaler already introduces a bit of latency (33ms). If I feed the signal through my receiver, it will introduce additional latency in an effort to perfectly synchronize audio and video. I would rather have less latency and a minor sync problem.

3) I often operate the computer without sound. Right now, since I'm surfing the web, I don't feel the need to listen to anything. Thus the receiver is off. It puts out about 200 watts at idle since it is a fairly high power, high bias unit (a Denon 3808CI if you are wondering). I'd rather save the power, and more importantly not heat up my room, when it isn't needed. Can't do that if I feed video through it.

My setup is designed to meet my needs, and it does very well. It has no issues with anything, except for Blu-ray. The only reason it has such an issue is a stupid artificial restriction.

I'll just repeat what the guy above already told you - "Your setup sounds needlessly convoluted for no good reason."

I can tell you have reasons for such a weird setup, but you do that to yourself. I mean you have a HDMI receiver for your PC... with no HDMI display attached to it?
Stop the PC-think and trying to make one system do EVERYTHING. Nobody cares about one-off PC setups. If you can afford all that kit you've mentioned, a more reasonable thing to meet all your requirements is to buy standalone equipment. A $1200 25" display... buy a damn DB player.. good lord man.

Re:Hell I might build one for home (4, Insightful)

hairyfeet (841228) | more than 2 years ago | (#38169084)

Or you could just go to TPB and download MKVs and be done with it. Its this endless bullshit that makes the MPAA companies an epic fail. All I want is an avi file, that's all. My dad has a little Nbox player that doesn't play copy protected bullshit so its of no use to me, also my netbook gets great battery life for playing avi files but i bet if i start playing DRM it'll go to shit.

So why the fuck won't they sell me an avi file? Are they somehow gonna magically make all those HD rips disappear off of TPB? Nope, they are just fucking folks like me that WANT to hand them the money but whome they won't give any content without making us do a little dance. it reminds me of that old Python bit in Time Bandits where Robin Hood would have one of his men punch a poor person before they would hand them anything "just to make them feel they earned it".

Well fuck you MPAA, if you won't accept my money for product thanks to piracy I can get the same product for free. you haven't stopped a damned thing, just pissed off people like me that would have happily handed you the money for a useful product.

Re:Hell I might build one for home (1)

wagnerrp (1305589) | more than 2 years ago | (#38170244)

Because AVI is a garbage container, that doesn't actually support even a quarter of the codecs and capabilities that have been shoehorned into it over the years.

Re:Hell I might build one for home (1)

tibit (1762298) | more than 2 years ago | (#38169592)

You do know that splitting out an HDMI clock requires fairly simple hardware and you only need one HDMI output from your computer for that, right?

Re:Hell I might build one for home (2)

RulerOf (975607) | more than 2 years ago | (#38170250)

It'd probably be cheaper and more practical for you to just get a copy of AnyDVD HD [slysoft.com] and play Blu-Rays to your heart's content.

Am I missing something. (4, Insightful)

jellomizer (103300) | more than 2 years ago | (#38168108)

Ok the data is encrypted... But the TV's and stuff use it are consumer devices. Many of them are below the $300 mark.
So if some guy found a chip that decodes HDMI in a $100.00 device takes it out and wires a new device with a different function and sells it for $300.00 he may be making money without actually decryption the HDMI. I mean my TV is HDMI. and a digital single goes into the DLP chip It would be logical that the DLP data is unencrypted by the time those electrons get there.

Re:Am I missing something. (1)

GameboyRMH (1153867) | more than 2 years ago | (#38168152)

You're right, that's just not legal or easy. If you're not afraid to mod your TV though, you can tap into some output lines of the HDCP decoder to get an unencrypted feed.

Re:Am I missing something. (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38168286)

That's not how it works in practice. The TV doesn't have a specific chip for decoding HDCP. And the STB does not have one for encoding. It's most likely built into a larg System-on-Chip which is orders of magnitude more difficult to tamper with...

Re:Am I missing something. (1, Insightful)

symbolset (646467) | more than 2 years ago | (#38168422)

At some point the device has to decrypt the stream into "Frame begin. Scanline begin. red pixel, 12.43%. green pixel, 0.004%. blue pixel 48.32%. red pixel, ..." And that's the end of that story.

Re:Am I missing something. (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38168704)

The TV doesn't have a specific chip for decoding HDCP. And the STB does not have one for encoding.

Actually, the STB does encrypt the signal with HDCP, and the TV does the reverse. The thing is, the ones behind HDCP tell TV and STB manufacturers that any uncompressed unencrypted signal needs to be buried, for example, by not using top or bottom layer of a PCB. Just imagine that - you can almost buy a TV, hook your 24/30/36 lines on a PCB and get uncompressed video. It is a pity that uncompressed video, normal 1080p, takes 4.5Gbps.

Re:Am I missing something. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38169488)

Is this really true? I have a modified Oppo Blu-Ray player on my desk, with an unencrypted SDI output on it. The SDI mod is a small board that's soldered onto unencrypted video lines on the PCB. I'm not in the USA, this player was purchases legally from somewhere in Europe, it's totally region-free, outputs any Blu-Ray content in HD-SDI, and I believe it is fully legal where I am.

Re:Am I missing something. (5, Interesting)

CyberDragon777 (1573387) | more than 2 years ago | (#38168736)

That's not how it works in practice. The TV doesn't have a specific chip for decoding HDCP.

This [analog.com] $8 chip disagrees with you.
Load it up with some keys and you get the unencrypted audio/video stream on the output pins.

Re:Am I missing something. (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38169052)

That chip does not support HDCP

Re:Am I missing something. (1)

Stewie241 (1035724) | more than 2 years ago | (#38169430)

That chip does not support HDCP

I wonder why it says: The ADV7612 incorporates Xpressview fast switching on both input HDMI ports. Using Analog Devices, Inc., hardware-based HDCP engine that minimizes software overhead, Xpressview technology allows fast switching between both HDMI input ports in less than 1 second.

In the information page then.

Re:Am I missing something. (1)

tibit (1762298) | more than 2 years ago | (#38169708)

It does. It even, apparently, comes from the factory with keys in its OTP prom.

Re:Am I missing something. (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38169752)

That's only one variant of the chip. All others do.

Re:Am I missing something. (1)

SuricouRaven (1897204) | more than 2 years ago | (#38169398)

Not 'most likely.' It's a certainty. The HDMI licence requires it.

Re:Am I missing something. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38168388)

To make a device that decodes HDMI, you need to get a key from whatever agency gives those out. They will want to examine your device, and will not give you a key if you are dumping the unencrypted data out the other side. If you re-use your key later in a device that does that, they will blacklist your key, essentially screwing over all of your customers for both devices. The bad press you'd get for doing that is meant to be the incentive not to abuse the key system.

This device sidesteps the whole issue because it has no revokable key; it breaks the encryption entirely.

Re:Am I missing something. (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38168810)

So is there anything that can compress unencrypted HDMI on the fly? Pro equipment? Graphic cards? Connect the FPGA device and this with a HDMI cable and you have a realtime high-def ripping platform, future proof. FPGA's isn't something that a hacker or release group will have problem setting up, let alone organized crime.
And Intel said it's not practical to break HDCP..lol..also ripping unencrypted HDMI stream is not practical, it didn't need protection.

Great, now FPGA programmers will be illegal (4, Insightful)

IGnatius T Foobar (4328) | more than 2 years ago | (#38168280)

What our German friends seem to have forgotten is that in the United States, we have the awesome lobbying power of the MPAA. Now they're going to make it difficult to impossible to buy FPGA programmers. If that sounds ridiculous to you, remember how difficult they made it to obtain Smart Card writers once people started figuring out how to clone DirecTV cards.

Re:Great, now FPGA programmers will be illegal (2)

HornWumpus (783565) | more than 2 years ago | (#38168344)

I don't remember having any trouble getting smart card readers/writers/unloopers etc.

Re:Great, now FPGA programmers will be illegal (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38168380)

Don't you thing that maybe, just maybe, we in Europe are tried of having to deal with American insanity? I realise its not your fault, but it is your problem.

Re:Great, now FPGA programmers will be illegal (2)

IGnatius T Foobar (4328) | more than 2 years ago | (#38168830)

Not to worry -- many of us in America are tired of having to deal with American insanity as well. We're on the brink of collapse due to the power held by special interests.

Re:Great, now FPGA programmers will be illegal (1)

Bucky24 (1943328) | more than 2 years ago | (#38170070)

No, he's not saying it's a GOOD thing that the MPAA will do this. Trust me, we the people understand how tired you are of it. Sadly there ain't jack shit most of us can do about it.

Re:Great, now FPGA programmers will be illegal (1)

ThePeices (635180) | more than 2 years ago | (#38168570)

Oh I dont think that they can do that.

How exactly are you going to stop people accessing a JTAG port on the FPGA? JTAG has been around for donkeys years, and there are many open source JTAG interfaces availiable for a low cost, or that you can build yourself.

If you ban or restrict the sale of commercial programmers, you cant stop somebody building their own from current open source designs.

Re:Great, now FPGA programmers will be illegal (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38168808)

Why shouldn't you license such apparatuses?
"Only trained professional electrician should wield such tools. What are ordinary people to do with them but burn their houses while trying to do something potentially illegal." Just a little good old fashioned American scaremongering and wonders happen.

Hell, if this applies to laboratory equipment, a whole bunches of chemicals, guns, motor vehicles - retail of electrical components and tools is just a little addition to the list. Hell, in Soviet Russia they even had a register of typewriters, complete with sample pages.

Re:Great, now FPGA programmers will be illegal (1)

Bucky24 (1943328) | more than 2 years ago | (#38170080)

MPAA vs FSF... I can see them somehow managing to get open source made illegal.

Re:Great, now FPGA programmers will be illegal (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38170380)

How exactly are you going to stop people accessing a JTAG port on the FPGA?

I just assumed they were going to GBAG the FWEP onto the MSEL and FOOB it.

are these acronyms supposed to stand for something? i didn't think that far

No, not so much (1)

Sycraft-fu (314770) | more than 2 years ago | (#38168612)

They try and outlaw FPGAs they'll find themselves up against a massive backlash from companies far bigger than they are. People like Cisco, Intel, and so on. FPGAs get used in all kinds of commercial gear. They aren't a hardware hacker's toy (not that they can't be that just isn't what they are for) they are a device when it would cost too much to do a run of ASICs, but you need more specialization than a CPU can give you. Also they are for devices that need field updatability.

http://www.easy-mony.blogspot.com/ (-1, Offtopic)

heemhamoo1 (2517388) | more than 2 years ago | (#38168328)

t would be too expensive to build a system that could conduct a real-time decryption of the data stream. Internet and Businesses Online http://www.easy-mony.blogspot.com/ [blogspot.com] download free hd images http://imgshowcase.blogspot.com/ [blogspot.com]

Since when is €200 = $350? (2)

LogistX (814694) | more than 2 years ago | (#38168384)

At no point in the entire history of the Euro has €200 been $350. The Euro peaked in 2008 at around $1.60 and is today at $1.33. At that conversion rate, €200 equals about $266.

Re:Since when is €200 = $350? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38168450)

Apparently 200€ is the academic price. 350$ is the normal retail price or so wrote heise.de a few day ago.

Re:Since when is €200 = $350? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38168488)

Unless you're Amazon, in which case €99 equals $79.

Re:Since when is €200 = $350? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38168510)

It's $350 when you add in shipping, tax, and foreign exchange rate fees.

Re:Since when is €200 = $350? (4, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38168646)

At no point in the entire history of the Euro has €200 been $350. The Euro peaked in 2008 at around $1.60 and is today at $1.33. At that conversion rate, €200 equals about $266.

Looks like a Digilent Atlys board.
http://digilentinc.com/Products/Catalog.cfm?NavPath=2,400&Cat=10&FPGA

The US price is 199.99 academic, or 349.99 for non-academic.

Conversion rate? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38168400)

Since when does €200 = $350 US? Even if we assume the "high" rate that the Euro used to fetch, it was still only worth about 1.4 USD, thus equated to approximately $280 US, not $350.

top plugins for seo (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38168440)

Here a list of top SEO Plugins for WordPress 2011. Feel free to add one plugins which I’ve missed thru commenting below and don’t forget to subscribe!
http://funnyphones.net/?p=690

Why? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38168470)

This solution doesn't make too much sense given that tools are readily available to capture the source material before it is decoded/uncompressed and sent over HDMI. Many available tools can open up Blu-ray discs (with AnyDVD HD being the most prominent). As well, individuals that have the know-how can often capture the MPEG2/AVC TS streams from STBs via FireWire.

Clarification (5, Informative)

LikwidCirkel (1542097) | more than 2 years ago | (#38168474)

Since some people seem confused as to why this is special and what it actually does.... I'll try to explain some things.

Yes, HDCP happens right at the I/O chip, and you can extract unencrypted raw video bitstreams in a variety of ways. All involve actually opening up the receiver device and soldering on wires.

Typical HDCP compliant devices use a ROM with a vendor key that's attached right to the I/O device. Industry standard devices such as the ADV7441 or AD9889 from Analog Devices fully support this, and interface to the rest of the system with a standard raw video bit stream. The contents of these vendor ROMs are typically unique to each vendor and their contents are not even disclosed to the vendor. They do not contain the master key, but are somehow related to it. This is cheap - the ROM's probably cost pennies, and the cost is more about registering as a certified HDCP compliant device. It's pretty much a plug-and-play solution for display device vendors - simply attach the vendor code ROM to the receiver chip, and the device just outputs unencrypted video to the rest of the system.

There are various mod kits for adding SDI or unencrypted DVI/HDMI outputs to things like Blu-Ray players, but they all work just by connecting to the raw bitstream lines AFTER the decryption at the actual HDMI receiver chip.

On an HDMI cable, the actual encryption that takes place is specific to keys on both sides, so can't generally be universally cracked. If a vendor key becomes compromised, future Blu-Ray players can blacklist it.

What makes this solution useful, is that it's just about the only way to crack the encryption on-the-wire without having to open anything up or solder anything, and it can't be prevented by simply blacklisting vendor keys.

It'll find a use. (2)

jtownatpunk.net (245670) | more than 2 years ago | (#38168530)

Back when the key was leaked, I figured the only thing that would keep it from being put to use was the lack of a practical use. But now there's talk of releasing movies on PPV in conjunction with their release in theaters. A device like this could have 1080 BD-quality rips of movies available on the internet the same day they're in theaters. Just grab the stream via PPV, compress it, and seed it. Also applies to any other PPV event that normally wouldn't be available anywhere but thru the cable company.

Re:It'll find a use. (5, Insightful)

wagnerrp (1305589) | more than 2 years ago | (#38168936)

So someone comes up with a working product capable of keyless, real-time HDCP decryption, and the first thing you want to do is use it to throw content up on bittorrent. You see, this is why the rest of us can't have nice things...

Re:It'll find a use. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38169338)

I have nice things....

Re:It'll find a use. (1)

cynyr (703126) | more than 2 years ago | (#38169552)

do you have a better idea of what to do with it?

Re:It'll find a use. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38170032)

do you have a better idea of what to do with it?

Ambilight clones.

Re:It'll find a use. (2)

wagnerrp (1305589) | more than 2 years ago | (#38170050)

Use it to bypass HDCP issues where two devices are unwilling to talk to each other. Use it to bypass ICT (image constraint token) or SO (selective output). Use it for DVRs that are incapable of complying with CableLabs' restrictions, or in other locales which have no conditional access mechanism. Use it for any number of other legitimate fair use reasons that don't involve content piracy or copyright infringement.

Price (1)

aplamon (2020804) | more than 2 years ago | (#38168580)

I can't help notice the horrible exchange rate they get..

Or you could just buy it today... (1)

Palmateer (1533975) | more than 2 years ago | (#38168750)

This guy's been selling a variety of products to allow your old component or VGA only devices play from HDMI sources. http://www.hdfury.com/buy-hdfury-now/ [hdfury.com] Some models are around $250

bring an umbrealla (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38168928)

you know: if everybody believes in dragons .. lo-and-behold: there are dragons! (same thing holds with rain)
"the electron belongs to the people(tm)"

Already cracked long time ago (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38168986)

All you need is a dual core cpu and 1.6GB of RAM
http://www.cs.sunysb.edu/~rob/hdcp.html

Blu-ray (2)

Citizen of Earth (569446) | more than 2 years ago | (#38169078)

Blu-ray content can be ripped *exactly* using programs like MakeMKV and all the significant video media is released on Blu-ray these days. There's no need to try to capture this material from HDMI.

Re:Blu-ray (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38170052)

What if I want to record my xbox360 games in high def, and the game doesn't support this feature in software. HDCP doesn't allow for the video stream to be split, so a solution like this would be one of very few options.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?