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!

HD-DVD and Blu-Ray AACS DRM Cracked

samzenpus posted more than 7 years ago | from the that-didn't-take-long dept.

Encryption 432

EGSonikku writes "According to this article on Endgadget, the AACS DRM used in HD-DVD and Blu-Ray has been cracked. The program allows one to decrypt and dump the video for play on a users hard drive, or it can be burned to a blank HD-DVD and played on a stand-alone player. According to the accompanying video, a source release for the program will be made available in January. Time to get that $200 Xbox 360 HD-DVD drive?" Warning: this link contains video.

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

Cheers! (0, Redundant)

wframe9109 (899486) | more than 7 years ago | (#17384720)

While I won't be joining the uber-expensive HD parade for several years, This is still good (tentative) news.

Re:Cheers! (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17384740)

Not to me, it isn't. This will help speed up the adoption of these formats. I'd like them both to totally fail, due to their restrictive DRM. As long as the formats enjoy some success, the content providers will keep pushing for the strong DRM.

Re:Cheers! (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17384798)

How exactly are their DRM schemes any more restrictive than DVD's?

Re:Cheers! (1)

evilviper (135110) | more than 7 years ago | (#17384890)

I'd like them both to totally fail, due to their restrictive DRM.
...EXACTLY like DVDs before them...

Re:Cheers! (1)

MrAnnoyanceToYou (654053) | more than 7 years ago | (#17385098)

I'd like to see them both fail for their restrictive DRM, but they won't. So instead I'd like to see them fail for their pathetic and petty infighting reminiscent of Betamacs and VHS. Anyone over the age of 40 I've talked to about the two formats has said, "What, you mean like Betamacs and VHS?" Just keep telling people that that's what this reminds you of, and wait for someone to start selling a less draconian product. You'll have a long wait, but the moral high ground anyways.

Re:Cheers! (1)

woof69 (952829) | more than 7 years ago | (#17385198)

its Betamax with am X http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betamax [wikipedia.org]

Re:Cheers! (1)

dangitman (862676) | more than 7 years ago | (#17385210)

That's because Betamax is eXtreme, dude.

Re:Cheers! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17385370)

I wish I was enough of a nerd to know about the text-editor wars (vi vs emacs), 'cause there's a heck of a joke to be made about "Betamacs" in there somewhere.

Re:Cheers! (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17385492)

Something like "Just like the Beta-emacs vs vi-HS wars!" ?

Re:Cheers! (4, Insightful)

msobkow (48369) | more than 7 years ago | (#17385314)

I agree. We shouldn't have to risk harassment from the *AA for exercising rights that have been granted to us by precendence in different countries, especially those which find their root in UK/Commonwealth legal systems.

It's unfair to expect the individual consumer to fend off such attacks, and insulting to the intent of law to allow the attacks to occur in the first place. The *AA and the various DRM fans are responsible for developing products and solutions/proposals that are compliant with the laws of their target markets, and should not be trying to shove their vision down our throats just to protect oligopoly and monopoly economic models.

The same goes for all industries. Why else has the EU so soundly rejected US proposals to make their patent database a global starting point for managing IP? It's stuffed with speculative junk patents.

Actually... (3, Insightful)

alexandreracine (859693) | more than 7 years ago | (#17384818)

now that it is crack, I might buy one :)

Not really cracked, more like circumvented (5, Interesting)

sith (15384) | more than 7 years ago | (#17384734)

As best as I've been able to gather from what I've read today, the very clever fellow just implemented that publicly available decryption routine, and also discovered an (as of yet unreleased) method for obtaining decryption keys. It seems very likely from everything I've read that he is pulling the keys from the PowerDVD program - perhaps they're left unencrypted similar to the original DeCSS obtained a key from the Xing player?

In any case, it will be interesting to see how this is dealt with, and whether key revocation can/can't break this. The author thinks it can't - the cat is out of the bag and is staying that way.

We'll see. I think it's good news for us though, no matter what.

Re:Not really cracked, more like circumvented (5, Interesting)

Myen (734499) | more than 7 years ago | (#17384760)

Yes, and the Engadget article that is TFA is mistaken... He didn't supply any keys, just disc IDs (to map to human readable names of the discs). The place where the keys would have been were all stubbed out with all nulls.

If this is a crack for the DRM, then GPG is a crack for PGP.

Re:Not really cracked, more like circumvented (5, Insightful)

FuturePastNow (836765) | more than 7 years ago | (#17384802)

According to the program's creator:

I was very surprise to realize that the title key is there, in memory!

Older systems make Trusted Computing their bitch. Oh yeah.

Re:Not really cracked, more like circumvented (5, Interesting)

Rufus211 (221883) | more than 7 years ago | (#17384830)

As best as I've been able to gather from what I've read today, the very clever fellow just implemented that publicly available decryption routine, and also discovered an (as of yet unreleased) method for obtaining decryption keys. It seems very likely from everything I've read that he is pulling the keys from the PowerDVD program - perhaps they're left unencrypted similar to the original DeCSS obtained a key from the Xing player?


Exactly. I've read the source code he released and it's less than 500 lines of Java. All it does is open each file on an HD-DVD and call the built-in Java AES decryption functions on each "pack" of HD data. There's a slight bit of handling for the pack format and all, but it's straight from the AACS spec.

Now the interesting thing I found from the "pre-recorded video book" [aacsla.com] spec were these two quotes (page 18):
A licensed product shall treat its Device Keys as highly confidential, as defined in the license agreement.
and
Except where otherwise provided for in these specifications, the values used to enable playback of AACS content (e.g. Title Keys and Volume ID) shall be discarded upon removal of the instance of media from which they were retrieved. Any derived or intermediate cryptographic values shall also be discarded.

So it seems that PowerDVD (or whatever player was used) was fully within the spec to no protect the Title Keys that are assumed to have be swipped by this prog.

Re:Not really cracked, more like circumvented (4, Interesting)

Junta (36770) | more than 7 years ago | (#17385074)

Looks like from his FAQ that he figured a deterministic way a particular piece of HD-DVD software stores the key in memory. Of course, it's always going to be the case the key is in memory during playback, finding the address would be the pain.. Wonder how he knew what to look for so quickly... Well, suppose he did have a couple of distinct movies, he probably had a set of addresses that obviously changed between discs or titles, and probably some tell-tale strings...

So he probably doesn't have the program's key (it would be in memory a short time probably if well implemented, but ultimately probably gettable, if the program can read it's own key, anyone can). However, expect content providers to audit how easily the key material is locatable in memory (i.e. how deterministic the key memory address is relative to program base address) and revoke keys in future pressings and force upgrades to software users.

Of course, with a few keys out it becomes problematic to hide the locations. Ultimately, the program has to know the offset to the key to use it, so there are going to be hoops to jump through, but using a known title with known key means the address of the key can be found and sampled over a few playback attempts, the memory address of the program analyzed to see if some pattern emerges or some variable points the right way....

BTW, if it was PowerDVD (which he never explicitly said), he is cocky actually showing that program running in his demonstration. PowerDVD is going to be under careful analysis now and his job will be made more difficult likely.

Of course, he could be more clever than I'm guessing, but the indications seem to be memory analysis of HD-DVD playback software.

Anyway, beyond making more hoops to go through, content providers cannot be so stupid as to think the problem technically insurmountable. It's all about demonstrating clear intent to violate DMCA and take legal rather technical measures to 'deal' with the problem.

Re:Not really cracked, more like circumvented (1)

Rufus211 (221883) | more than 7 years ago | (#17385108)

program's key (it would be in memory a short time probably if well implemented, but ultimately probably gettable, if the program can read it's own key, anyone can).

True, but they can make it extremely difficult to the point of absurdity. Only ever store parts of the key in memory. Load those parts from memory into registers and generate the key programatically entirely within a register. Once you're done with the key (a few 100 instructions) blow away that register.

In order to aquire the key you'd have to control the scheduler from within the kernel, schedule a context switch to occure exactly within the vulnerable window, and figure out which register actually contains the value you want. Certainly possible, but once you've gotten to that level of detail you've already reverse engineered the entire player so you can just calculate out the key ourself.

Re:Not really cracked, more like circumvented (3, Interesting)

Anpheus (908711) | more than 7 years ago | (#17385214)

It's an infinite regression of cats and mice, not turtles! But seriously, it seems to me a lot easier to find the function that performs the decryption, which should be easy to find because AES is a common algorithm, see which argument is the input key, and then insert assembly to output that key somehow, store it in a known location in memory, etc. Of course, then it would be their turn to respond by either revoking the key in new releases, or obfuscating the decryption function at a low level, etc. However, it still seems to me that it would be much easier to edit the machine code than to screw around with context switching and hoping to grab a useful pointer or the key itself. It sounds like the first battle was won, but it'll be interesting to see what the DRM guys do next.

Re:Not really cracked, more like circumvented (1)

SickLittleMonkey (135315) | more than 7 years ago | (#17385222)

In order to aquire the key you'd have to control the scheduler from within the kernel, schedule a context switch to occure exactly within the vulnerable window, and figure out which register actually contains the value you want.


Um, this is usually called debugging. ;-)

SLM

Re:Not really cracked, more like circumvented (4, Insightful)

Bios_Hakr (68586) | more than 7 years ago | (#17385078)

It's pretty early in the rollout. The execs will kill off the format and release a new system within a year. HD-DVD-2 or something like that.

Then, they'll just not give the keys to PowerDVD.

Note to all future hackers. Wait till you have critical mass before you release a crack.

Re:Not really cracked, more like circumvented (5, Informative)

dtfinch (661405) | more than 7 years ago | (#17385238)

They have many keys now, one for each model of player. I don't remember the exact terminology, but the player private keys are used to decrypt the disk key stored on the disk. There are many copies of the disk key, each encrypted with a different player's public key. If they want to revoke a player, they just don't include a copy of the disk key encrypted with that player's public key on future disks. So that player can play old disks, but they'll need to replace it to play new disks.

Revoke the keys (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17385242)

>>The execs will kill off the format and release a new system within a year. HD-DVD-2 or something like that.

They won't have to change a thing. Read the HDDVD spec and you'll see that keys can be revoked, so all future HDDVDs will not play with that "disallowed" player.

Re:Not really cracked, more like circumvented (1)

Sancho (17056) | more than 7 years ago | (#17385272)

The fallout from that would be pretty big. Even though only a few people have next-gen players (compared to, say, DVD or VHS) if people find out that the format was killed and replaced very quickly, they'll be hesitant to buy into the second format. Why should they, if the industry is so quick to obsolecense?

This is dangerous timing for all parties involved. The content providers want to make sure the format is secure, but they don't want to have to scrap it so soon. Revokable keys supposedly fixed this, but time will tell. PC players will always be crackable, if someone wants to spend the time to do it.

A more likely scenario is that they revoke the PowerDVD (if that's what he used) keys and refuse to reissue. Kill the PC format, settle the inevitable lawsuit (the cost to do this will be considered less than the piracy losses) and move on. Leave DVDs for PCs and next gen formats for standalone players that are far harder to crack. They shouldn't need to change the entire format.

It takes a while... (5, Informative)

FuturePastNow (836765) | more than 7 years ago | (#17384754)

The site's Farked, Digged, and everything else already, but here's the forum this was first posted to: http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=119871 [doom9.org]

It contains a download link to the program.

Re:It takes a while... (5, Informative)

interiot (50685) | more than 7 years ago | (#17384794)

Duggmirror [duggmirror.com] has a copy of the doom9 thread, as well as a link to the source code [rapidshare.com] .

As another poster said, the package contains several title keys already extracted via some method. It's not clear how the author extracted the keys, or whether it's possible for the AACS people to revoke a player in order to prevent future keys from being leaked the way they currently are.

Re:It takes a while... (1)

minus_273 (174041) | more than 7 years ago | (#17384816)

AACS was designed so that keys could be revoked fro future titles.

Re:It takes a while... (4, Interesting)

interiot (50685) | more than 7 years ago | (#17384844)

I don't really know much about it, but keys included in the package are title keys (eg. download the source code [rapidshare.com] , see Readme.txt and TKDB.cfg, and see the list of keys for specific titles: Full Metal Jacket, Van Helsing, Tomb Raider 1, Apollo 13, The Last Samurai, and The Fugitive). Those keys probably can't be revoked (those specific titles are already mastered and are in release). But do the included keys give the AACS people enough information to identify the specific player that the author is using to extract the title keys from?

Re:It takes a while... (3, Interesting)

qbwiz (87077) | more than 7 years ago | (#17384848)

Wouldn't it suck to have your HD-DVD player stop working for new titles, because someone was using its key? Or are all HD-DVD players networked, so their keys can be changed at any time?

Re:It takes a while... (1)

interiot (50685) | more than 7 years ago | (#17384880)

Most likely the author was using a PC-based software player, so most likely, legitimate end-users just need to download an update to be able to play new movies. (the update would both include new player keys, and an attempted fix for whatever way people are pulling title keys from the software)

Re:It takes a while... (1)

skiflyer (716312) | more than 7 years ago | (#17384924)

oooo yeah, that's going to be a great way to help the adoption of HD-DVD/BluRay right now.

Sorry your brand new laptop with a built in drive won't play the newest movies, but some people have hacked the software on your laptop, yes that's right the software we licensed and approved, and now you must update the same software with new keys to watch new movies.

AKA, you're on an airplane, you have no connection, and things just plain don't work.

Re:It takes a while... (1)

Datasage (214357) | more than 7 years ago | (#17385060)

True, but whats to stop a key from a hardware based player from being compromised? You could release a firmware update, but how many people would expect to install it?

If a large number of device keys become compromised, revoking all of them would be a nightmare. I don't see how its possible to keep a key secret forever. Especially in software.

Re:It takes a while... (4, Funny)

bigberk (547360) | more than 7 years ago | (#17385322)

Wouldn't it suck to have your HD-DVD player stop working for new titles, because someone was using its key?
Sure it might suck, but it's one of those little annoyances we live with because we know that Theft is Theft. We're only too happy to pay for a product and then have it cripple apart before our eyes. Sure, I might no longer be able to use the equipment I paid big money for, but will sleep comfortably at night knowing that at least the companies have protected their profits, just a little bit.

Re:It takes a while... (4, Insightful)

evilviper (135110) | more than 7 years ago | (#17384868)

AACS was designed so that keys could be revoked fro future titles.

So was DVD CSS...

Would you care to guess how well that worked?

Re:It takes a while... (1)

Jeremy Erwin (2054) | more than 7 years ago | (#17385182)

But CSS can be brute forced. Although it uses a 40 bit key, flaws in the algorithm reduce it to about 25 bits strength, and the correct key can be found in 18 seconds on a PIII-450. It doesn't rely on anything that can be revoked.

We don't know if this system is as vulnerable to such an attack. Key revocation could protect future titles from this particular program.

Re:It takes a while... (4, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17384846)

By giving out the actual per-disc keys, the guy has avoided the fate of the original decss hack which used a player key that was "revoked". Unless the "AACS people" can figure out what player key he used to get those disc keys, they can't revoke it, though they can re-author the disc with a different disc key for the next batch (which one supposes could be leaked the exact same way as the first, whatever that way is).

(For those that don't know, every disc's content is encrypted with a key particular to that disc. That key is then encrypted repeatedly with all of the device keys that are currently authorized to play that disc. Presumably there are dozens or hundreds of spare unassigned device keys in there for future use, as well. Thus, the player uses it's device key to decrypt the matching copy of the disc key, then uses the disc key to decrypt the disc. In the DVD days, device keys wouldn't be "revoked" as such, they would simply quit being used on new discs, so the device could play all old discs, but would be unable to get a disc key for new ones. Not sure if AACS actually added an actualy revocation list for device keys that would completely disable the device, as it is apparently able to do for other cryptographic keys like the HDCP keys)

P2P links then... (2, Informative)

_Shorty-dammit (555739) | more than 7 years ago | (#17384808)

ed2k://|file|BackupHDDVD.zip|17964|4860e9248663d52 dc47bfc98d61ec6d7|/ magnet:?xt=urn:bitprint:ZHZI65X7J4NIX7TU7KLDIZXIJA 62SXX7.OBRERVSGGVO4OMWW7JN7BPC2BPDCE2U5NBUVU3Y&xt= urn:ed2khash:4860e9248663d52dc47bfc98d61ec6d7&dn=B ackupHDDVD.zip&xl=17964

Well and good... (4, Insightful)

Ekhymosis (949557) | more than 7 years ago | (#17384774)

But I would like to know how this will affect the customer as well. I know short term that DRM is bad and all, especially with the "where there's a will, there's a way" mentality in cracking it, but seeing as how these companies invest (or rather waste) millions in copy protection schemes, will they jack the prices up to cover the cost of their mistakes? I think this practice has become mainstream, no?

Re:Well and good... (1)

Mieckowski (741243) | more than 7 years ago | (#17384832)

They set the price to maximize their profit, it doesn't have anything to do with the cost. If they could make more money by raising prices, they would (in reality people would probably by less DVDs).

Re:Well and good... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17384928)

Of course the customer pays through the nose for all of this, both in direct cost for the hardware required to protect against copy protection, and indirectly since the resulting system is less robust, as it must interpret any glitch as an attempt to hack the DRM, and lock up accordingly.

Peter Gutmann published a great writeup [auckland.ac.nz] on this yesterday.

Re:Well and good... (1)

Tweekster (949766) | more than 7 years ago | (#17384986)

at 30 dollars a title they wont have all that much raising prices and being a successfull format. hell hd dvd and bluray are both up for grabs whether they will even be relevant in a couple of years.

Re:Well and good... (1)

bm_luethke (253362) | more than 7 years ago | (#17384990)

Partly it is going to depend on how long you consider "short term" and "long term".

As of right now, and (in my opinion) another decade or two, there will be a VERY high dollar fight the industry will put on. Both legally and Technically, personally I think we have only seen the tip of the iceberg of what they are going to end up trying to do. Legally I do not know how far it will go, so far the industry sponsored bills pass near unanimously, so while many here like to blame one side the reality is that there is nothing close to a winner on each side (one talks good, but when it comes time to vote doesn't follow through).

During that time period I expect prices to continue to rise (compare the HD disks to DVD's) and quality to degrade (can not take the risk given the cost) and the burden on the consumer to become fairly high (see current state of HD - will my player work with my TV or not?). In the long term (decades) not good. The industry is already starting to see it in declining profits. From what I can tell, you call this "long term" and I call it "short term".

There has to be some case where things are going to stabilize. It is impossible to create something people can view and keep it secretly encrypted where it can not be copied. So, at some point that *has* to become accepted reality. Will they eventually understand this and adapt, or will they be replaced by something that does? Dunno, my money is on eventually adapting, or at the least when the Next Great Thing comes along immediately get absorbed (see video rental stores).

Re:Well and good... (1)

Dachannien (617929) | more than 7 years ago | (#17385172)

They're already suffering gazillions of dollars in annual losses due to piracy, if you believe the content cabal. You'd think that would already be priced in, and a successful DRM scheme would cause prices to drop from their current levels.

Of course, when you consider that this is an industry that claims they're protecting artists/performers/actors/crew/etc. and then stabs them in the back by trying to cut their royalties, I think we can rest assured that your prediction will come true.

Piracy not equal to Losses (4, Insightful)

kurt555gs (309278) | more than 7 years ago | (#17385360)

I do not agree that piracy has anything to do with losses. Who is to say that those that watch movies without paying a fee would actually pay to see them in the first place?

The only way there is a real loss is if some one is SELLING copied DVDs as if they are original. That is not what we are talking about here. We are in this insane mindset that if we see or hear something that we owe money to some one for it.

Utter stupidity if you really think about the concept.

The only way there is a real loss, is if you counterfeit the media and sell it to some one that actually WANTS to pay for it.

This whole issue of IP ownership makes no sense if one steps back and clearly thinks about it.

Cheers

   

Wrong conclusion... (5, Interesting)

im_thatoneguy (819432) | more than 7 years ago | (#17384784)

The correct conclusion is: 'Finally! Now I don't have to buy an HD-DVD Player.'

I don't mind purchasing an HD-DVD and then just downloading its illegal doppelganger. I DO mind purchasing an overpriced paperweight to keep me legal. I looked at Xbox Live Marketplace from the perspective of:

"Rent 44 HD movies. or Buy HD-DVD Player and a movie." I decided I would get much more HD goodness out of downloads than just a player.

It's sort of like the way I purchase Star Trek for my Xbox and then download a copy for my PC as well. Sure it's illegal, but I look at it from the perspective of: I purchased it so that I could watch it, and watch it I shall.

Re:Wrong conclusion... (1, Insightful)

farble1670 (803356) | more than 7 years ago | (#17385258)


It's sort of like the way I purchase Star Trek for my Xbox and then download a copy for my PC as well. Sure it's illegal, but I look at it from the perspective of: I purchased it so that I could watch it, and watch it I shall.


"I don't like the DUI laws, so drink and drive I shall!"

"I think I deserve more pay, so embezzle I shall!"

"I don't have a problem with heroin, so deal it i shall!"


The most basic acceptance test of any moral or social philosophy is whether it can be applied generally. Yours boils down to: I do what I think is correct. Okay, but please don't call the cops when someone punches you in the face and takes your wallet, because I am sure that it was a perfectly acceptable action to the perpetrator. After all, they really needed the $20 and it's an insignificant amount of $$$ to you, and your nose will heal.


I don't like the way things are going either, but your only morally defensible position is to not purchase your Star Trek movie in the first place if you do not like the implicit agreements attached to it. Go ahead and violate the agreement, your not in the minority in doing so, but please, leave out the lame justification for your actions.

Re:Wrong conclusion... (2, Interesting)

Chandon Seldon (43083) | more than 7 years ago | (#17385436)

There's nothing morally wrong with downloading the content and watching it. It's *data* - not only that, it's an element of our culture. How could accepting someone's offer to share culture be wrong?

Re:Wrong conclusion... (2, Interesting)

Paul Jakma (2677) | more than 7 years ago | (#17385394)

Sure it's illegal,

Actually, no, that's not sure at all.

Re:Wrong conclusion... (3, Interesting)

spire3661 (1038968) | more than 7 years ago | (#17385424)

Again here we are. The gulf between media and licenses. He paid for legal license to watch said performance. Why on earth should he be charged full price to watch the same performance in a different format. If we could find a way to separate license and format, the digital age could truly begin. But the media companies dont want to make the license and the media separate. If I buy a HD-DVD, and I want a DVD copy of it, I should be able to get one at the cost of manufacturing the MEDIA , not the media AND the license. I could go on and on, but the point is, beyond value added pieces to new formats, the license should be sufficient to be able to watch that performance anywhere, in any format.

Damn it! (4, Funny)

fahrbot-bot (874524) | more than 7 years ago | (#17384796)

Cracked already? I had December 29th in the pool.

Cracker actually working for HD-DVD Consortium? (4, Interesting)

BenJeremy (181303) | more than 7 years ago | (#17384804)

Really just a stab here, but maybe given lackluster sales of hardware, the consortium hired a ringer to play "DVD Jon" for a day and "leak" the crack to the public, thus encouraging some support from a DRM-weary public?

The industry knows piracy is not really a big problem - they still make mountains of cash, and society needs a little underlying "lawlessness" (like speeding, for example) to ease pressure. Perhaps some industry insiders sick of kowtowing to the IP Lawyers decided to leak the crack to the public in a round-about manner?

If true, it's brilliant.... if not, then they missed the boat.

Re:Cracker actually working for HD-DVD Consortium? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17385266)

Really just a stab here, but maybe given lackluster sales of hardware, the consortium hired a ringer to play "DVD Jon" for a day and "leak" the crack to the public, thus encouraging some support from a DRM-weary public?


Mr BenJeremy aka Mr Conspiracy Theory. Could you give us details on this alleged crack? What exactly does this program crack? Or is it so that it just decrypts by implementing a public standard? Show us some code that extracts keys from disc / player and we might have news, but still no conspiracy theory.

Re:Cracker actually working for HD-DVD Consortium? (1)

iainl (136759) | more than 7 years ago | (#17385488)

Lacklustre sales of the hardware?

I'll give you that they're not completely phenomenal, but they're good enough that they fly off the shelves at the rate they can manufacture them.

Link (5, Informative)

h4rdc0d3 (724980) | more than 7 years ago | (#17384812)

If anyone wants to try it out, here is a link to the executable and source code (Java)...

http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=119871 [doom9.org]

There is more detailed info in the included FAQ. The bad news is, the program itself isn't actually "cracking" anything. The author used publicly available AACS documents to write his own decrypter (e.g. just as PowerDVD or WinDVD would). The catch is, you must provide the decryption keys to this software in order to rip the movies from the disk.

However, the good news is, it looks like he may have found a way to extract the needed decryption key(s) from the HD-DVDs. He doesn't explain how in the documentation or provide any keys, but if he figured it out I'm sure others will - and that means more advanced and powerful tools shouldn't bee too far off.

Mmm but would you do it? (2, Interesting)

atari2600 (545988) | more than 7 years ago | (#17384840)

I think Hollywood has a slight edge here. Consider this: Ripped DVDs came around to 4 - 4.5GB and while this isn't a huge amount of diskspace, it is still a considerable amount of space. Even so, a 250GB HDD (you can get this for
Now coming to HD-DVDs (the screenshots from the article show approximately 24GB of space being used or 24GiB, whatever tickles your fancy). This means a 250GB will be able to hold
The point is with the Hi-Def media, it doesn't make as much sense to rip every movie you have and store it on your fileserver for the next year or two. This is awesome news but i am not sure i'll be ripping HD-DVDs/Blu-ray disks like i used to rip DVDs. These things take way too much space. Hollywood would have an edge if they priced the stuff at around 15-20$ - i'd buy one than let a movie take up 30GB on my machine.

Re:Mmm but would you do it? (1)

FuturePastNow (836765) | more than 7 years ago | (#17384872)

Yes, but who keeps their ripped DVDs in their original format? Most people use XVID or similar compression to get them down to 700-800MB (or, I should say, most P2P downloads are that size and format).

A dual-layer HD-DVD is 30GB, similar compression would get that down to about 5GB. That's $2 worth of hard drive space.

Re:Mmm but would you do it? (1)

Jeremy Erwin (2054) | more than 7 years ago | (#17385230)

Putting aside the whole "re-compressing adds artifacts" argument for the moment, the only reason DVDs can be further compressed is that MPEG-4 is more efficient than MPEG-2. HD-DVDs use vc-1, which is roughly comparable to mpeg-4. It's already quite compressed.

Do XVID rips still reduce the multichannel Dolby Digital down to mp3?

Re:Mmm but would you do it? (1)

FuturePastNow (836765) | more than 7 years ago | (#17385294)

I can only assume the compression schemes will keep improving. Also, Blu-Ray and HD-DVD movies are unlikely to completely fill disks- they'll probably continue to be movie on layer 1, extras on layer 2, etc. I'm too lazy to look that up right now.

As for the audio- if you encode it yourself, good programs will let you choose how to format the audio, or just leave it as AC3.

Re:Mmm but would you do it? (2, Interesting)

BenJeremy (181303) | more than 7 years ago | (#17384938)

True, but you could also use a better compression algorithm and knock the size down... say, use a new version of RatDVD, call it "RatHD" and preserve all of the menuing and features, but compress it down to 8 or 9 GB and save to DL. Even better, if you don't have 1080p, compress it down to 720p and save more space, but still get higher def than DVD as a backup of your movie discs. Store your retail HD discs away some place safe and use your backups for playback (or keep on the HTPC HD for easy retrieval)

Re:Mmm but would you do it? (1)

mwilliamson (672411) | more than 7 years ago | (#17384956)

Multi Terabyte harddrives are on the way. There was once a time that ripping a DVD was considered ubsurd because of the amount of space it consumed. Before that, ripping uncompressed CD audio was considered ubsurd for the same reason. With new developments like vertical storage, I don't think space will stay an issue for long.

Re:Mmm but would you do it? (4, Insightful)

TexasDex (709519) | more than 7 years ago | (#17385048)

The point is with the Hi-Def media, it doesn't make as much sense to rip every movie you have and store it on your fileserver for the next year or two. This is awesome news but i am not sure i'll be ripping HD-DVDs/Blu-ray disks like i used to rip DVDs. These things take way too much space. Hollywood would have an edge if they priced the stuff at around 15-20$ - i'd buy one than let a movie take up 30GB on my machine.
Wait 5 years and read that post again. I bet you'll laugh. "Only 24 gigs?" you'll say. "That's nothing!" I guarentee it.

To put it in prespective: My old 486 had a hard disk with less than 400 MB of space. But it also had a CD-ROM drive. Your average CD back then held 650MB. Yes, it had an optical drive that was bigger than its hard disk. Nobody ever thought to even include copy protection on the CD because storing that much data was insane, and transmitting it over the internet even more so. With the advent of MP3 and bigger storage and broadband it became commonplace to trade music online.

My brother got one of the first computers that came equipped with a DVD drive, which has a capacity of 4.7 GB (I'm ignoring the whole multi-layer DVD format for sake of simplicity). It also came with a hard disk that could hold up to 2 Gigabytes. Now your average DVD can be recompressed without too much quality loss to, say, 1.5GB, and modern hard disks will store hundreds of them with ease, and you can download them in an hour or two on a good connection, or maybe a day on an okay one. Are you noticing a recurring theme here?

The truth is that Blu-ray isn't all that big compared to the hard disks of today, especially not when you look at previous optical formats and how big they were in comparison to the hard disks of the era in which they were first made. Heck I could fit a Blu-ray disk or two on my iPod and have some space left over.

Such is the progress of technology (by which I mean mostly storage space and bandwidth, but also compression technology and the processor power to implement it). A digital movie standard such as Blu-ray or HDDVD should be expected to last a decade. They will probably last even longer than that because hi-def technology has matured to the point where users couldn't possibly need higher resolution or more pristine sound effects. Where do you think magnetic storage will be in ten years? Heck, where do you think solid-state storage will be in ten years?

The point is that technology changes, and people invent things like MP3 that let you squeeze more into smaller space. Which means movie format won't stop piracy because it's "too big".

Re:Mmm but would you do it? (1)

melikamp (631205) | more than 7 years ago | (#17385180)

Now your average DVD can be recompressed without too much quality loss to, say, 1.5GB [...]

The truth is that Blu-ray isn't all that big compared to the hard disks of today [...]

Good post. I just want to point out that since Blu-ray packs the same damn movie, it can be just as well compressed to the same 1.5GB without much loss. And who is willing to pay for higher resolution in movies these days? May be I am just getting old, but I cannot see any pixels on a regular 36 inch CRT TV when I watch a movie. Everything is sharp and smooth. (Console games are a different matter.)

Re:Mmm but would you do it? (1)

Chandon Seldon (43083) | more than 7 years ago | (#17385494)

They will probably last even longer than that because hi-def technology has matured to the point where users couldn't possibly need higher resolution or more pristine sound effects.

Bullshit. There's easily space for another generation worth of quality improvement in video - at least one more generation. Find yourself a 50" 1080p display, and then watch some 1080p content at 2 - 3 feet (17" computer monitor distance). The screen should fill your vision, including most of your peripheral vision - better than a good movie theater. And... you can see the pixels. They're not very big, but they're there and they're obvious.

I'm not saying this is necessary today, but people are already playing video games at higher-than-HDTV resolutions. Saying that there will be no demand for that in 10 years is short sighted at best.

Why this may be good... (4, Insightful)

mitchell_pgh (536538) | more than 7 years ago | (#17384854)

Basically HD-DVD and Blu-Ray aren't even options for me at this point as the DRM associated with it has me shaking my head. While I'm willing to pay $20+ for a movie, I want to be able to use the movie on my terms after the initial purchase.

If this hack proves to be valid, I would actually consider investing in the technology as it opens the format up to Linux/Unix/OSX/etc.

Why this may be good...for the planet (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17385054)

"While I'm willing to pay $20+ for a movie, I want to be able to use the movie on my terms after the initial purchase."

Even if "your terms" consist of sharing your copy with the planet?

BTW I believe both standards took this "failure" into account.

Re:Why this may be good...for the planet (1)

Adult film producer (866485) | more than 7 years ago | (#17385490)

No, that means being able to rip the disc/compress it/play on it on his laptop.. or do some resizing so it can play on his ipod, or maybe his mythtv media playing box doesn't have much disk space... There are plenty of reasons why the consumer loses with digital restriction management.

Sort of Cracked (5, Informative)

Jah-Wren Ryel (80510) | more than 7 years ago | (#17384858)

It sounds like he didn't "crack" AACS, he just extracted the disc keys for certain titles.

A quick and dirty and probably somewhat inaccurate description of the way AACS works is that each disc is encrypted with a single 'disc key' and then that key is encrypted once with every known 'player key,' and each of those is stored on the disc. So, if you have an authorized player, it will find the version of the disc key that it knows how to decrypt and then use that to decrypt the disc for playback.

My guess is that he used one of the software players like WinDVD or PowerDVD that now sort of support HD-DVD and BLU-RAY. But instead of extracting their player key and publishing that, he played a disc in a debug environment and extracted the 'disc key' for that specific title.

The studios thought that they would be able to 'revoke' disclosed player keys by just not using them on any discs pressed after the disclosure was made public. This guy's approach seems to be to distribute disc keys and then anyone with the same disc can decrypt that specific title, thus making it harder for the studios to guess which player keys need revoking.

I think that this guy's approach will be most useful to widescale pirating because all it takes is for one person to decrypt a movie and share it with a billion of his closest friends. But the 'regular joe' who just wants to copy his BD-HDs to his hard disk for ease of playback or maybe to cut clips from it for his own home movie won't benefit because chances are, the keys for his particular discs won't be widely known enough for him to find them.

So, I now look forward to various HD titles from disc (rather than from broadcast, which are already common if you know where to look) showing up on P2P and elsewhere, I'm still not purchasing any AACS playback system since the "crack" is not (yet) useful enough for me to exercise typical fair-use rights of format shifting and personal editing.

Re:Sort of Cracked (2, Interesting)

TubeSteak (669689) | more than 7 years ago | (#17385122)

But the 'regular joe' who just wants to copy his BD-HDs to his hard disk for ease of playback or maybe to cut clips from it for his own home movie won't benefit because chances are, the keys for his particular discs won't be widely known enough for him to find them.
Maybe I misunderstood you, but you seem to be suggesting that in the future, not all disc keys will be available.

I recall reading (a long time ago) that teh intarnet pirates had already ripped about 3/4 of Net Flix's catalog. I imagine that they've upped that percentage significantly since.

IMO, once the knowledge behind grabbing disc keys spreads, every single HD title that comes out will promptly have it's disc key ripped out & uploaded to some gracenote style database.

Release groups are very dedicated to what they do.

Re:Sort of Cracked (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17385496)

Where the release groups get benefits from? is what i wonder since a lot of time. Sometimes, there is people who dedicate hobbie time to crack a certain barrier, but release groups seems to be more organizated, don't they?

Re:Sort of Cracked (1)

Gorm! (139624) | more than 7 years ago | (#17385178)

A quick and dirty and probably somewhat inaccurate description of the way AACS works is that each disc is encrypted with a single 'disc key' and then that key is encrypted once with every known 'player key,' and each of those is stored on the disc. So, if you have an authorized player, it will find the version of the disc key that it knows how to decrypt and then use that to decrypt the disc for playback.

It seems like this also opens up the possibility for an attack on the player keys. Since that the plaintext (the disk key) that the player key is encrypting is now known, it sounds like an attempt to recover a player key just got easier; especially since there are multiple disk keys to work against and multiple player keys to recover.

Re:Sort of Cracked (3, Insightful)

Dachannien (617929) | more than 7 years ago | (#17385192)

If that's how he's doing it - by distributing disc keys - then the studios will just start making shorter runs of the discs from the same master. There'll be, say, a hundred different disc keys for the same movie, and you won't know which one you have until you try them all. An individual or group would have to get hold of all 100 discs (or at least the portions of each that store the disc keys) to compile a complete list.

While it's certainly a move in the right direction, unfortunately, it's far from ideal. The reason I feel no moral compunction about saying this is because of your astute observation that this DRM scheme utterly fails to prevent piracy and instead is unfairly limiting how legitimate customers can use the products they buy. It's likely that this was the primary intent all along.

Zip does NOT contain any keys (1)

Rufus211 (221883) | more than 7 years ago | (#17384894)

Just a clarification because BoingBoing is confused. The zip file from doom9 does NOT contain any keys. All it contains is lines like:

CE6339246F34087AB355681DEB656D23DCD5BD86=Full Metal Jacket | 1-00000000000000000000000000000000
That's the sha1 hash of the file F:\aacs\VTKF000.AACS, a human readable name, and where the title keys should be. Notice the title key is all 0's, which is obviously wrong.

Also the fact that BoingBoing ran the program and it slightly changed the file is meaningless. Trying to decode a file with the key "0" will obviously not do what you want.

Re:Zip does NOT contain any keys (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17384952)

Notice the title key is all 0's, which is obviously wrong.

All zeros?

That's amazing, I've got the same combination on my luggage!

Re:Zip does NOT contain any keys (0, Offtopic)

Junta (36770) | more than 7 years ago | (#17384998)

Damn, I was redundant... I know that thought was echoing through almost everyone's heads on that one..

Re:Zip does NOT contain any keys (5, Funny)

Junta (36770) | more than 7 years ago | (#17384980)

Notice the title key is all 0's
That's amazing! I've got the same combination on my luggage!

HDCP (5, Insightful)

StreetStealth (980200) | more than 7 years ago | (#17384902)

It seems to me most people are seeing this as a means to:

A) Place-shift HD-DVD content (despite current storage constraints)
B) Pirate HD-DVD content (despite current bandwidth constraints)

when I see the much more immediately relevant issue being that of HDCP: If this crack can be rolled into something on the order of a VLC plugin, there's a chance I'll actually be able to use my technically-more-than-capable, yet not-a-member-of-the-HDCP-club LCD display to view commercial 720p content.

Re:HDCP (1)

Jeremy Erwin (2054) | more than 7 years ago | (#17385246)

HD-DVD and Bluray players have component video outputs. In the future, resolution reduction may be used, but right now, the full resolution of the disc is output. Granted, some players have buggy 720p outputs, but that's another issue entirely.

Endgadget - is that a new site? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17384918)

I've read Engadget.com but never Endgadget.com....

GG (2, Funny)

moheezy (1032844) | more than 7 years ago | (#17385002)

Several years to develop a new optical storage device with an emphasis on DRM, cracked in a few months.

Re:GG (1)

ShaneThePain (929627) | more than 7 years ago | (#17385256)

weeks.
This guy started in early december. He cracked it in like 3 weeks.

What a genius.

BackupHDDVD FAQ (5, Informative)

Black Acid (219707) | more than 7 years ago | (#17385050)

B a c k u p H D - D V D F A Q

-What is "Backup HDDVD" for?
It can do backup copies of HD DVD movies that YOU OWN! I don't want anyone to do piracy here! This software is a good way to protect your investment, because I have notice that this type of media seems very fragile, if it's scratched a little or dirty, it won't play. It seems less tolerent than DVD format. (Higher density!)

-What "Backup HDDVD" is doing exactly?
This is a java based command line utility that decrypt video files (.evo) from a HD DVD disk that you own, to your hard drive and you can play them back with a HD DVD player software.

-What are the system requirements to use "Backup HDDVD"
1 - A Windows based system
2 - A HDDVD disk drive
3 - A HDDVD player software (like PowerDVD)
4 - A HDDVD movie(s)
5 - Java rutime 1.5
6 - The possibility to access the content of the disk with a drive letter under windows.
(you may need UDF 2.5 file system driver for this)
7 - A lot of free hard disk space to backup your movies!

-Was your first HDDVD movie hard to decrypt?

It took me around a week to do. But I have wasted few days
trying to work on too complicated approach. In fact, it is very simple.

-How do you do that?

The program itself has nothing special. It simply implement the AACS decyption protocol. I have followed the freely available documents about AACS
Have a look at: www.aacsla.com The trick, is to find what they call the "Title keys". So I figure out how to extract them.

-How do you extract the "Title keys"?

I won't explain it in detail. Read the AACS doc first. You will understand. The title keys are located on the disk in encrypted form, but for a
content to be played, it has to be decrypted! So where is the decrypted version of the title key? Think about it...

-What kind of crypto algorithms are involved?
Standards algorithms:
        ECC-160
        AES-128
Look in the AACS doc for more details.

-What is the TKDB.cfg file?
This is the Title key Database file. It holds the decryption keys for the movies.

-What is the format of this file?
Field 1: SHA1 Hash of the VTKF000.AACS file on your HDDVD disk.
Next fields are pipe "|" delimited.
-Movie Title
-A variable number of Title key, pipe delimited
    You have a key number followed by the key value like:
      12-08A3DC61910280F2...

Key values are 128 bits long, so 16 bytes, or 32 hexadecimal characters long.

-The TKDB.cfg file provided with your program is empty or incomplete, what can I do?
Here is my TKDB.cfg:

CE6339246F34087AB355681DEB656D23DCD5BD86=Full Metal Jacket | 1-0000000000000000000000
0000000000
486198E3855B57CD40F6DC0C60645BDE8E1E9AC5=Van Helsing |19-0000000000000000000000
0000000000
3D357B0653A66176583C5218FD0149EAF8832FB0=The Last Samurai | 1-0000000000000000000000
0000000000

-What do you think of the technical aspects of AACS?

The design is not that bad, but it's too easy to have an insecure player implementation somewhere. And just one bad implementation is all it needs
to get the keys! There will always be insecure implementations of a player somewhere! And the "Revocation system" is totaly useless if you use
the Title key directly.

-Is there any known problems with the decryption?
Yes. I call this problem the "Nav chain" bug. I realize that I have a lot of frame skipping at playback after the decryption, so I hunted down the problem. To avoid the frame skipping, I patch the video file. This fix allows smooth playback of the movie, but there are some side effects.

-What are the side effects of the "Nav chain" bug fix?

You cannot do fast forward, or backward using the round dial, but you can still use the progress bar to navigate through the film. So it's not that bad... For some reason, the sub-titles don't seems to work anymore. It may be a side effect of the nav chain bug. But may be not...

-Why the "Nav chain" bug is called the "Nav chain" bug?

Well, it has something to do with the chaining of navigation pack. Look at some doc about standard DVD VOB file, you will see. If someone wants to help me with that bug, please do!

-Are you going to support Blu-Ray?

I don't own a Blu-Ray drive!

-Do you plan to do a user interface version?

No, other people will do. You have the source code, so enjoy it!

-Do you plan to do a Linux version?
See the previous answer.
I don't use any windows specific API and this is a java application!
A port to Linux will be easy.

-Can you send me some decryption keys? PLEASE!
No.

-I have a question for you, can I send you an e-mail?

If you have something like, a technical problem using the software, look in the forums talking about Backup HDDVD first. There will be a lot of information and everyone will help each other out. If there is a major flaw in the program, I will post another version, but honestly I realy want people to bring Backup HDDVD to a higher level without me!

nothing is perfect (0)

ILuvRamen (1026668) | more than 7 years ago | (#17385128)

eventually a software program has to convert whatever garbled crap they put on any disc to a valid video and audio stream so it's always only a matter of time before someone writes a player that (sort of) dumps the buffer of what goes onto the screen and to the sound card into a file.

Re:nothing is perfect (2, Informative)

Sancho (17056) | more than 7 years ago | (#17385282)

Trusted Computing solves this 'problem'. Debuggers won't be allowed to run on 'protected' programs, and this will be enforced on the hardware level (each program will effectively have to ask for permission to run).

For right now, not everything has TPM. We'll see how this changes in a few years (almost all new computers do include the TPM chip).

Will every player key be cracked? (4, Insightful)

dave1g (680091) | more than 7 years ago | (#17385142)

So the player key is hard to get at, so this guy worked around it and just copied the title key from memory, which is encrypted on disc with every player key. Since you have the plain text (of the title key) and each of the cypher texts(the encrypted title key), aren't there attacks to figure out all the player keys? And actually its worse since you have many(possibly all?) title keys and all their corresponding encrypted versions that has to extremely limit the search space for the player keys. This would be an even worse problem since they cant just revoke every key. All the hardware would break! Lawsuits galore!

Seems like the whole house of cards will fall down.

Re:Will every player key be cracked? (1)

dave1g (680091) | more than 7 years ago | (#17385284)

Known Plaintext Attack - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Known-plaintext_attac k [wikipedia.org]

Related Key Attack - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Related-key_attack [wikipedia.org]

Is AES not susceptible to these attacks?

Re:Will every player key be cracked? (2, Informative)

bigberk (547360) | more than 7 years ago | (#17385346)

I haven't studied this implementation, but techniques like salts can easily avoid known PT/CT pair attacks

Re:Will every player key be cracked? (1)

Rufus211 (221883) | more than 7 years ago | (#17385358)

If you look through the spec there are actually 2 revocation lists: player and content. Player revocation is so they can blacklist this version of PowerDVD so that it can't be to crack any future movies. Content revocation is so they can blacklist all the current movies so they can't be used in a known plaintext attack against future version of PowerDVD.

That is assuming anything ever actually gets blacklisted (hello class action lawyers).

Irony - HD-DVD Crack Thread has HD-DVD Add (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17385154)

OK, do not ask why I am posting AC, but here is a screen shot of the add when I went into this post to read comments and, ah, hhhm, lets leave it there.

http://img100.imageshack.us/img100/8830/hddvdcrack andaddfv3.jpg [imageshack.us]

When will they learn (0, Redundant)

Swimport (1034164) | more than 7 years ago | (#17385208)

All copy protection will be cracked eventually. Although satellite TV isn't reliably cracked... The copy protection does keep 95% of people from copying dvds...

Great job with the title keys (4, Interesting)

Myria (562655) | more than 7 years ago | (#17385240)

The hacker didn't extract the player key. This might be due to the difficulty of getting the player key, but it really doesn't matter.

The use of title keys instead is a great strategy. It means that the revocation system is worthless - AACSLA may not even know which player is compromised. Gray/black-area web sites can maintain big lists of title keys for movies without a whole lot of trouble. The bigger issue will eventually be getting each new movie to the trusted few pirates that are capable of extracting keys. This is no big deal now, but would be if and once these formats become popular.

A counterattack from Hollywood could be to produce thousands of distinct masters of each movie; the same movie would have thousands of different editions that differ only by their title key. I don't know the current state of disk production however, so this may not be feasible.

The revocation system is itself problematic anyway. A person seeking to damage the system itself would try to crack the most popular player, even if it's more difficult than other players. The cost of a massive recall - plus the fines the manufacturer would pay for their player being the one cracked - would heavily discourage the use of the revocation system. It seems like the revocation system is more of a deterrent against both pirates (if you crack a player we'll change the key making your work worthless) and manufacturers (if you don't obfuscate well enough, we'll cost you millions of dollars).

DVD had a revocation system too, but it was never used. DeCSS and the Drink or Die program that preceded it used a player key, but the CSS algorithm was so badly flawed that it wasn't difficult to derive the remaining player keys. This will not happen with AACS, because they're using real crypto this time.

Melissa

What's the fuss,anyway? (0)

headpushslap (583517) | more than 7 years ago | (#17385252)

Last I checked there are possibly three films in the entire world with an actual HD source (Lucasfilms Star Wars Prequels) aside from that you are getting what exactly? A 1080p picture upsampled from 320p? That's an awful lot of extrapolation (3x?). The bits just aren't there. If you record a telephone call with even the higest end equipment you are still constrained by the horrific quality of the signal coming from your telephone speaker. FMJ from 70mm(?) to HDDVD, I still have to think that the original recording is just not high enough quality to justify the cost(s) of HDDVD (DRM, $$$, ETC)

Re:What's the fuss,anyway? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17385342)

Could you enlighten us, what is the "resolution" of 35mm film? "320p"? You think there won't be new films shot in full digital or transferred from film, or transferred from old masters? And those are not capable of 1080p and extrapolation will be needed? You should stop watching those 70's movies, smoking bananas seems to harm your brain.

Re:What's the fuss,anyway? (2, Informative)

Rufus211 (221883) | more than 7 years ago | (#17385384)

Who said the source was 320p? The source for most movies is a 35mm film print. The current digital cinema spec calls for resolutions that are essentially 1080p and 2160p.

Re:What's the fuss,anyway? (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17385416)

Commercially available 35mm negative scanners can extract in excess of 10 MPixel per frame. The Digital Imaging Project reflects this by stating that 35mm film should be encoded as native 4200 pixel in longest dimension (depending on actual aspect used this could mean 2600x4200 px). How much data is actually present in a given movie will depend on grain, process, age of film etc. The bits, in point of fact, are there.

Oh, and there is no 70mm version of FMJ, it was shot spherically on 35mm and cut to 1.66:1 which means loss of 20% of image data, let's say no more than 4TB of uncompressed native resolution video. You'll get more from anamorphic movies, and a lot more from 70mm.

Why wait till January? (1)

Air-conditioned cowh (552882) | more than 7 years ago | (#17385262)

Is there some kind of randsom involved?

If the source code exists, which it must if the code exists, then why sit on it?

It just gives someone the chance to bury it before it sees the light of day.

Re:Why wait till January? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17385452)

It's Java. You can always decompile [kpdus.com] it. Not the prettiest code, I know, but it at least gives a decent idea of what's going on.

Blu-ray designers were right after all (1)

News for nerds (448130) | more than 7 years ago | (#17385268)

This kind of situation is what they had in mind when they added BD+ [wikipedia.org] in the Blu-ray spec. OTOH, the HD DVD is out of luck.

Re:Blu-ray designers were right after all (1)

s0matic (1044336) | more than 7 years ago | (#17385448)

Maybe it's the reverse. Assuming BD+ takes a while to become circumvented, consumers will flock to HD-DVD in the mean time because their fair-use can't be practiced on Blu-Ray discs. And that push may be significant to send Blu-Ray the way of the Betamax.

What if... (1)

grilled-cheese (889107) | more than 7 years ago | (#17385270)

What if this "cracker" was just a clever ploy by the HD-DVD industry? If people are able to rip (protect) their own property, wouldn't this just encourage more people to buy HD-DVD over blue-ray? It would be an interesting effect to see HD-DVD sales to skyrocket over blue-ray just because people felt they could do with their property what they want. Could this just be a huge MPAA case study to see how big a marketing element drm-free media is?

PowerDVD (1)

postmortem (906676) | more than 7 years ago | (#17385412)

That particular copy/edition of PowerDVD is going to be very popular...

Please improve the source code (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17385414)

A quickly glanced at the java sources.
They are crap. No use of NIO, using Hashtable instead of HashMap and all sorts of strange quirks.
I predict, a proper version will be *much* faster in decrypting the content.
Please, someone with time on their hands: Improve this code
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?