×

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!

AACS Revision Cracked A Week Before Release

Zonk posted more than 6 years ago | from the damned-time-traveling-pirates dept.

Security 346

stevedcc writes "Ars Technica is running a story about next week's release of AACS, which is intended to fix the currently compromised version. The only problem is, the patched version has already been cracked. From the article: 'AACS LA's attempts to stifle dissemination of AACS keys and prevent hackers from compromising new keys are obviously meeting with extremely limited success. The hacker collective continues to adapt to AACS revisions and is demonstrating a capacity to assimilate new volume keys at a rate which truly reveals the futility of resistance. If keys can be compromised before HD DVDs bearing those keys are even released into the wild, one has to question the viability of the entire key revocation model.'"

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

346 comments

waste of time (5, Insightful)

ILuvRamen (1026668) | more than 6 years ago | (#19168295)

If they put this much effort into making crappy movies not suck instead, they'd save a lot more money than trying to control every customer's lives

Re:waste of time (5, Insightful)

luckingfame (1099289) | more than 6 years ago | (#19168365)

There was a great quote by Robe Zombie about those anti-piracy commercials in the movie theatres that were running for a bit. "I'm sitting in the movie theatre, what more do you want?!?"

Re:waste of time (1)

Loconut1389 (455297) | more than 6 years ago | (#19168443)

Even if you -do- pirate the movie, by the time you see the video, it's too late. You're either a) already busted or b) not going to change your ways because you 'saw the light'

Just remember, you wouldn't 1:1 copy a car without the owner ever knowing.

Re:waste of time (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19168493)

WTF?

Re:waste of time (3, Interesting)

Loconut1389 (455297) | more than 6 years ago | (#19168917)

You've seen the videos haven't you?

"YOU WOULDN'T STEAL A CAR
YOU WOULDN'T STEAL A HANDBAG
YOU WOULDN'T STEAL A TELEVISION
YOU WOULDN'T STEAL A DVD"

I was just saying that when you 'steal' a movie by downloading it, you're not taking a copy away from someone- like when you steal a car or a handbag or a television, or anything tangible for that matter.

I also was saying that if you do pirate the movie, when you go to watch it and see the little video, its already too late for it to make a difference and wouldn't anyway.

Re:waste of time (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19169173)

Never seen 'em... (But then again, I -steal- all my movies...) :)

utter fuckpuppets (4, Insightful)

PurPaBOO (604533) | more than 6 years ago | (#19169223)

And then the utter fuckpuppets go on to say: "Buying pirated DVDs is stealing." This really gets my goat. Buying pirated DVDs is buying pirated DVDs. Stealing pirated DVDs would be stealing. Cnuts.

Re:waste of time (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19168487)

That's actually an insightful comment from Rob Zombie here. I always facepalm when I hear the annoying "JOHN! PUT YOUR CAMERA OFF! HAHAHAHA" comments every damn time.

Re:waste of time (4, Funny)

Rob T Firefly (844560) | more than 6 years ago | (#19168547)

The best response ever to that ad comparing piracy to theft, beginning with "You wouldn't steal a car..." is posted here. [b3ta.com]

Re:waste of time (2, Funny)

HTH NE1 (675604) | more than 6 years ago | (#19168879)

The best response ever to that ad comparing piracy to theft, beginning with "You wouldn't steal a car..." is posted here [b3ta.com].
Mmm, OK for a one-liner. I prefer to be a bit more creative [slashdot.org].

Re:waste of time (4, Funny)

Dogtanian (588974) | more than 6 years ago | (#19168695)

There was a great quote by Robe Zombie
Is that like a zombie that eats dressing gowns and kimonos?

Re:waste of time (5, Insightful)

l_bratch (865693) | more than 6 years ago | (#19168759)

The most confusing thing about the anti-piracy ads in cinemas (in the UK at least) is that they say something like:

"Don't watch pirated films - you'll lose the big screen image quality, and the incredible sound, and your view won't be spoiled by the person that goes to the toilet in front"

Whilst saying that last bit, they show a clip from a dodgy in-cinema cam job where somebody stands up in front of the camera.

What they fail to realise is that people do that in the cinema!

Are they for or against piracy, then? (1)

SanityInAnarchy (655584) | more than 6 years ago | (#19168951)

In the actual cinema, someone's going to get up and go to the bathroom, whereas in actual pirated movies, they aren't.

In fact, isn't that why we have the DMCA and DRM? Because they're so fucking terrified of a perfect 1:1 copy (DVD ISOs)?

Re:waste of time (1)

s.bots (1099921) | more than 6 years ago | (#19168957)

"Don't watch pirated films - you'll lose the big screen image quality, and the incredible sound, and your view won't be spoiled by the person that goes to the toilet in front"
They might as well be preaching to the choir; these people paid to see a shitty movie, it's quite likely they aren't watching a pirated version. Why anyone goes to a movie theater is beyond me: sticky floors, noisy people, ugly pubescent teens (or maybe /.ers?) making out, the list goes on. If you are going to go the legal way, wait until it's on DVD, rent it (since it won't be worth watching more than once) and forget about it.

Re:waste of time (5, Insightful)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 6 years ago | (#19169011)

In my local cinema, the sound quality is pretty poor (stereo only on most screens, and some muppet has done strange things to the equaliser that heavily emphasise the bass), and the image is slightly blurred and full of little flickers where dust has got into the film.

A DVD and a home projector and surround sound system give much better video and audio quality, don't have adverts, and can be paused when you want to get up and go to the toilet in the middle. For the price of two of you going to the cinema, you can buy a DVD and renting is even cheaper.

The only still-extant reason for downloading is that it takes so long for films to get from the cinema to DVD. If they did simultaneous releases, then I would expect to see piracy fall a lot. Mind you, I'd also expect to see most cinemas go out of business...

Re:waste of time (2, Insightful)

Loconut1389 (455297) | more than 6 years ago | (#19169095)

Not to mention the teens making out behind you, the other teen on her cell phone in front and two seats over, the texan with the big hat in front of you and the screaming baby in the rear, the either freezing or burning hot temperature of the place, etc etc..

There's very little reason to go to the cinema anymore- it's not a group experience like it once was, you don't talk with people afterwards, in fact if you're lucky you only have to ask someone to shut up once. Home stereos can sound pretty great, and don't cost as much as they once did and even projectors are somewhat affordable, with big screen TV's being pretty great too.

There's very little reason not to watch on dvd, and the only reasons not to download is to support the people/companies involved if you like it or to avoid going to jail.

I have a huge collection of purchased dvds, so don't go pointing fingers at me, but I do have strong opinions about downloading.

It's okay... (5, Insightful)

Daychilde (744181) | more than 6 years ago | (#19168311)

...I'm sure someone will solve the problem by writing more laws.

That's always the solution, isn't it?

(oy.)

Re:It's okay... (1)

BosstonesOwn (794949) | more than 6 years ago | (#19168403)

Well , If we could get all the 18 or older slashdotters out of thier mothers basement for a day or two, maybe we could vote all the ass hats out of office that don't understand business has to evolve to survive ! Not kick itself in the ass every time it tries to stop us from watching a damn movie.

Re:It's okay... (2, Insightful)

TheRealMindChild (743925) | more than 6 years ago | (#19168423)

Right. We should get right to the root of it. Let's make it illegal to copy anything digitally. It's brilliant. I mean, what could go wrong???????????????????//

Re:It's okay... (5, Insightful)

digitrev (989335) | more than 6 years ago | (#19168985)

I'm going to attempt an analogy. This may be horribly flawed, but there is some logic here.

The current downloading of copyrighted files is akin to drinking during prohibition. The laws were on the books making drinking (sharing copyrighted files) illegal. However, that didn't stop people from drinking, and in fact simply forced the alcohol industry underground, where it was taken over by organized crime. The temperance movement (RIAA / MPAA) did their best to keep the laws on the books forcing what they thought was a horrible thing to become illegal. However in doing this, they made criminals out of everyday folk who blatantly disregarded the less than sensible laws. Had anyone tried to enforce the, dare I say it, stupid laws in place, they would have ended up with millions behind bars.

My point is that attempting to create or uphold laws that no one respects is futile. They can't and won't be able to prosecute every uploader of files, and eventually, the laws on the books will match the reality of what goes on in day to day life.

Re:It's okay... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19168891)

The hacker collective continues to adapt to AACS revisions and is demonstrating a capacity to assimilate new volume keys at a rate which truly reveals the futility of resistance.

collective? assimilate? futility? resistance?

For f***'s sake, when will TNG geeks stop incorporating TNG jargon into their everyday lives??

It's always "Question This," "Challenge That" - (4, Insightful)

toby (759) | more than 6 years ago | (#19168335)

Damn you long-haired smellies! Why can't you get with the program and just passively CONSUME!

Corporate Hypocrisy- It's In The Game! (5, Funny)

Dogtanian (588974) | more than 6 years ago | (#19168651)

Damn you long-haired smellies! Why can't you get with the program and just passively CONSUME!
EA did it! They told me to "Challenge Everything"!

To which they replied, "Foolish boy, that was just a vapid and insincere corporate slogan designed to sound vaguely cool to wannabe-rebellious (and utterly conformist) 13-year-olds..."

My mistake.

Re:It's always "Question This," "Challenge That" - (1)

MollyB (162595) | more than 6 years ago | (#19168665)

Yeah, we oughta go back to the Riverdale [wikipedia.org] Malt Shoppe and pay a quarter for three selections like 'Murrica's s'posed to be. We should've been happy with those shiny Juke Boxes...

Re:It's always "Question This," "Challenge That" - (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19168707)

That would make us major debtors. No thank you. More so, that our American fuhrer has changed the laws to work against citizens on bankruptcy.

Extremely Limited Success? (5, Insightful)

locokamil (850008) | more than 6 years ago | (#19168345)

You mean "failure"?

Remember, kids: It's not torture, it's "enhanced interrogation techniques".

Re:Extremely Limited Success? (1)

dattaway (3088) | more than 6 years ago | (#19168671)

Its too early to pull out. We must stand united and continue the course, otherwise freedom will win.

Hex or GTFO (5, Funny)

aichpvee (631243) | more than 6 years ago | (#19168351)

The article is missing the key, who's got it? I need to start a protest on digg!

Re:Hex or GTFO (4, Interesting)

kebes (861706) | more than 6 years ago | (#19168661)

That would actually be interesting. Digg ended the last uproar by saying "okay, we give up, go ahead and post it"... but by then the key had been posted to so many sites (largely in protest) that no one cared anymore. Even the AACS team must have realized that it was futile to now suppress the code. I'm sure they sent out plenty of other legal threats, but basically the code had been widely distributed.

But if someone posted a new Digg story, with the code... what would happen? Let's say Digg was the first (or one of the first) to "break" this story. Would Digg bury the story? Or let it stand? Would they begin another proactive campaign of suppressing the information? Or would they stick to their previous (rather belated) show of solidarity with their users? If they were one of the only sites distributing it, they would be (rightly) afraid of an imminent AACS legal threat.

It will be very interesting to see the reactions of the community and the AACS team as more keys are discovered and distributed. (Heck, it may occur that someone posts a bogus key story to Digg, just to mess with them.)

Dear DRM (1)

Romancer (19668) | more than 6 years ago | (#19168363)

Suck it!
.
.
.
.
Seriously. do any of these people see any other future where this "enabling" software isn't hated and despised to the point where we chear that it's been broken and can use our paid for media how we wish?

DRM (5, Insightful)

Ckwop (707653) | more than 6 years ago | (#19168367)

This is quickly making DRM look less like rights management and more like digital restrictions mockery. Of course, we knew this from the start. Any security strategy that depends on giving the attacker both the key and lock is doomed to fail.

The guys who make this DRM know its flawed but they still get paid when it fails. They must be quietly laughing all the way to the bank. Yet like morons the record labels keep handing money over. It's no wonder CD sales are declining when you're *that* clue-proof.

EMI has the right idea. Shock horror, if you give the customer what they want, they'll pay you for it. I never would have guessed!

Simon

Re:DRM (2, Insightful)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 6 years ago | (#19168453)

Only if your primary news source is Slashdot. The mainstream media still refers to DRM as 'copy protection' technology for the most part, when in fact it is usage restriction technology with no impact on copying at all.

Re:DRM (1)

anonymous_but_brave (1075911) | more than 6 years ago | (#19168545)

Hopefully, this will bring a great deal of frustration to the DRM people. I understand that this patch was released at the 'point of no return' in terms of disc manufacturing. This is a huge loss to them if they are still forced to (by economic concerns) release these discs as-is.

Re:DRM (1)

erroneus (253617) | more than 6 years ago | (#19168581)

Just to be clear, it's not record labels, it's movie people. (Okay, they are probably the same people, but still... we're talking about movies and [HD-]DVDs, not music and CDs.) So this has nothing to do with declining CD sales, but declining DVD sales... which, to my knowledge, there haven't been any such reports.

Re:DRM (1)

powerlord (28156) | more than 6 years ago | (#19169273)

No, but expect future reports from the HD-DVD consortium to base their slowing momentum on pirating (instead of loosing to Blu-Ray) :)

No, really? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19168387)

If keys can be compromised before HD DVDs bearing those keys are even released into the wild, one has to question the viability of the entire key revocation model.'

Really? You're kidding. I thought that made it more viable.

I'll leave it to someone else to explain how.

Here's your answer (1)

Weaselmancer (533834) | more than 6 years ago | (#19169129)

The keys being passed around before the release date shows that current laws aren't strong enough to stop piracy, and therefore successful lobbying for more draconian laws has a higher chance to proceed.

There's your pseudo-tinfoil hat answer. I hope I'm wrong.

C64 one more time (5, Interesting)

Anon-Admin (443764) | more than 6 years ago | (#19168389)

Sounds like the old days of the C64 boards. It started with 1day warez, soon there were 0day warez, before it was all done there were boards that only accepted -7day warez. That was warez (Cracked software) that were released no later than 7 days before the program was to hit the market!

Give up now and stop waisting money on something that will never work!

Re:C64 one more time (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19168621)

Haha...I remember back then with the C64 that the copy protection was "Look at the manual on page 53, paragraph 2, word 5 of the second sentence."

Which C64 games had copy protection (1)

Chuck Chunder (21021) | more than 6 years ago | (#19168829)

I don't remember seeing anything like that until I got a PC (and I think the first game I remember that has it was Elite, or Elite+).

Re:Which C64 games had copy protection (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19168975)

Both the C64 and spectrum had those funny manual work look up protections. There were a number of POKEs that would let you enter anything to proceed with the games. Generally just NOPing out the condition and branch instructions.

Re:Which C64 games had copy protection (1)

ip_vjl (410654) | more than 6 years ago | (#19168977)

MicroProse's F15 Strike Eagle [wikipedia.org] (combat flight sim) had a system like that.

They crafted it into part of the gameplay in that you had to enter your "secret code" as part of receiving your mission.

Re:Which C64 games had copy protection (1)

Minwee (522556) | more than 6 years ago | (#19169059)

Elite, at least on the C64, used something called 'Lenslok'. It involved placing a magic plastic lens up against the screen and then using that to an image of two letters which you needed to enter in order to continue running the game.

The more traditional "Read your manual" check wasn't used until later releases of the Elite series.

Re:Which C64 games had copy protection (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19169213)

Many, many later 64 programs had copy protection. Often this involved boot sequences that checked for the existence of error tracks on floppy disks that could not be copied via normal means - written outside the normal head range on the 1541 drive. The GEOS boot disk used this, as did some video games. It was really frustrating for several reasons, one because I tended to use the disks so much that they wore out, and two because the 1541 drive variant in the SX64 was different enough that these measures would cause the disks not to boot at all. Most cracking groups had very little trouble bypassing this silliness, something which obviously has not changed.

Re:C64 one more time (5, Funny)

badboy_tw2002 (524611) | more than 6 years ago | (#19169275)

True story: When I was a younger lad I got around that by taking my friends manual to the xerox machine at the library and for a couple bucks had the whole thing cracked. Much later on in life I ended up working for the same company I stole the game from. I took my boss out to lunch one day (he was the original programmer on the game in question), and as he offered payment I said "No no, its alright. I figure this ought to cover the royalties of the game I prirated :)" Guilt free am I!

Does this really come as a surprise??? (1)

CaptainPatent (1087643) | more than 6 years ago | (#19168397)

In anything DRM, the corporations move fast to protect their content, but the hackers on the other end always move faster. I have already heard this story told with HD-DVD replaced with almost any other type of physical media trying to employ a DRM scheme.

Bravo.. (4, Funny)

modi123 (750470) | more than 6 years ago | (#19168409)

I just gave my dual 21" dell lcds a mountain dew bath after reading "damned-time-traveling-pirates dept". I salute you editors - you have given me my happy thought. Now quickly, fly! Second star to the right and straight on until morning!

AACS? (5, Funny)

PineGreen (446635) | more than 6 years ago | (#19168435)

That's the dumbest fucking idea I've heard since I've been at Microsoft.

Re:AACS? (4, Funny)

JensenDied (1009293) | more than 6 years ago | (#19168499)

Normally this would be the perfect place for a "You must be new there," comment.

Re:AACS? (1)

dorix (414150) | more than 6 years ago | (#19169121)

Personally I only think those comments are truly funny when applied to a poster with a uid of four digits or less.

Re:AACS? (1)

dorix (414150) | more than 6 years ago | (#19169177)

Except I didn't read closely enough to see that you wrote "new there" instead of "new here". Doh.

mod d0wn (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19168441)

Declined 1n market AMERICA) might be

Does anybody else... (4, Interesting)

u-bend (1095729) | more than 6 years ago | (#19168485)

...feel like this will be one of those anthropological head-scratchers to historians in 50-100 years? DRM? What an odd culture they had there....

Re:Does anybody else... (3, Funny)

spun (1352) | more than 6 years ago | (#19168617)

Yes, exactly, they will think our outmoded techniques were so quaint. Their Reality Rights Management chips installed in every human at birth will simply prevent you from experiencing anything without paying someone for the privilege.

Re:Does anybody else... (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19169195)

Charles Stross had a great dig at this in his novel [i]Glasshouse[/i]:

'We know why the dark age happened,' Fiore continues. 'Our ancestors allowed their storage and processing architecture to proliferate uncontrollably, and they tended to throw away old technologies instead of virtualizing them. For reasons of commercial advantage, some of their largest entities deliberately created incompatible information formats and locked up huge quantities of useful material in them, so that when new architectures replaced old, the data became inaccessible. 'This particularly affected out records of personal and household activities during the latter half of the dark age. Early on, for example, we have a lot of film data captured by amateurs and home enthusiasts. They used a thing called a cine camera, which captured images on a photochemical medium. You could actually decode it with your eyeball. But a third of the way into the dark age, they switched to using magnetic storage tape, which degrades rapidly, then to digital storage, which was even worse because for no obvious reason they encrypted everything.

The same collective? (1)

i_like_spam (874080) | more than 6 years ago | (#19168501)

Is this the same collective responsible for releasing Spiderman 3 on the streets of Shanghai a week before the release of the movie?

Let's see how the fight is stocked. (1)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 6 years ago | (#19168507)

On one end, a business conglomerate with procedures to heed and to follow, with people working for money, getting paid whether or not their implementation works, as long as it is to specs.

On the other end, a bunch of people with no marketing, no PR, no quarter reports to heed and the goal to remove that crap, and whose only "payment" is to get the content the way they want it.

Which one do you think adapts faster and more efficiently?

The ever heard of cost vs benefit? (5, Insightful)

SSCGWLB (956147) | more than 6 years ago | (#19168509)

How is this economical for these companies? It should be simple:

ProfitA = $MEDIA_INCOME - DRM R&D - DRM content - lawsuits - alienated customers - recalls (i.e. rootkit)

ProfitB = $MEDIA_INCOME - piracy loss

I would bet that ProfitB is significantly larger then ProfitA.

Take into account (1)

geekoid (135745) | more than 6 years ago | (#19168613)

that they have been over inflating the value* of IP for years to the creators of this type of content. So they wuiold ahve to go to them and say they were wrong...or blame the canumers. Which is another way of blaming the market, but they can't do that wothout admitting 'defeat' Or more accuratly, that DRM can not stop the people stamping bit by bit copies and selling them by the thousands. WHich is where there significant copyright inringement loss is.

*I do believe it has value, but not nearly what the media industry says it is.

Re:The ever heard of cost vs benefit? (3, Insightful)

Thanster (669304) | more than 6 years ago | (#19168633)

Slight adjustment to your formula: ProfitA = $MEDIA_INCOME - DRM R&D - DRM content - lawsuits - alienated customers - recalls (i.e. rootkit) - piracy loss ProfitB = $MEDIA_INCOME - piracy loss Kinda makes it clearer :-)

Re:The ever heard of cost vs benefit? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19168827)

Slight adjustment to your formula:
 
Slight adjustment to your formula:
ProfitA = $MEDIA_INCOME - DRM R&D - DRM content - lawsuits - alienated customers - recalls (i.e. rootkit) - piracy loss
ProfitB = $MEDIA_INCOME - piracy loss
Kinda makes it clearer :-)
 
Kinda makes it clearer :-)
 
:-P

Ten years from now, kids will be reading (4, Interesting)

zappepcs (820751) | more than 6 years ago | (#19168515)

about the great Consumer Revolt of 2007 in history classes.

The list of revolt-ish type actions lately is getting quite long. I think the Internet is really starting to make its true value known.

Companies who want to force DRM on the consumers are simply terrified that they have no product and must force consumers to pay for distribution. The sad part is that they are wasting so much time, money, effort, and lobbying to try to stop what they never could before, and have no hope of stopping in the future; the sneaker-net is still alive and apparently doing very well with 500GB USB drives selling for less than 2 seasons of the Sopranos.

Digg, AACS, XM radio, and all that came before it. Oh, also that deal with the King and feet, the actress having sex on the beach... who knows how many more it will take ....

Re:Ten years from now, kids will be reading (5, Funny)

danbert8 (1024253) | more than 6 years ago | (#19168693)

Sad, I read this whole comment and the only thing I'll remember is "actress having sex on the beach".

Re:Ten years from now, kids will be reading (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19169167)

Ten years from now, kids will be reading about the great Consumer Revolt of 2007 in history classes. The list of revolt-ish type actions lately is getting quite long.

This is the danger of getting all of your news from a niche outlet like slashdot. If you think any of this knowledge is widespread or that the actions you're describing are significant, then you are out of touch with the world.

These actions are a tiny snowball someone's started rolling down a hill. It may keep rolling, picking up more snow, becoming larger and larger, until it destroys everything in its path...or it may just hit a tree and disintegrate, because it's tiny and trees are big, immobile, and strong.

In ten years, the history books may call these actions the precursor of the Great Consumer Revolt, but more likely they won't mention them at all. It's far too early to tell. If you want to make something big happen, you probably should make another snowball instead of counting on this one.

Life imprisonment for attempted piracy, anyone? (3, Interesting)

mercuriciodide (1082127) | more than 6 years ago | (#19168537)

"If keys can be compromised before HD DVDs bearing those keys are even released into the wild, one has to question the viability of the entire key revocation model.'" DRM won't be called into question. The real question to those with power and their minions is: what's the best punishment for offenders? Is it life imprisonment, the "solution" for such things as hacking the main page of a corporate website or committing "attempted piracy"?

DRM is stupid, give up! (1)

Bullfish (858648) | more than 6 years ago | (#19168593)

As long as the people in basements world wide outnumber the security programmers 10000 to 1 (if not more), such codes etc will be broken. Doesn't matter if they are software only, or embedded into chips etc, someone will find a way around it.

Activity time! (1, Funny)

Rob T Firefly (844560) | more than 6 years ago | (#19168631)

I think it would be fun to generate a big text file listing every possible string of 16 hex digits. We could post and mirror it everywhere, and pre-emptively cause another uproar when yet another of them turns out to be the new AACS key.

Re:Activity time! (4, Funny)

vidarh (309115) | more than 6 years ago | (#19168711)

16 hex digits is 8 bytes. Good luck trying to post 2^64 16 byte sequences anywhere in your lifetime.

Re:Activity time! (5, Funny)

cfulmer (3166) | more than 6 years ago | (#19168861)

Funny. I just did it. Of course, my file is compressed -- the decompression program takes FOREVER, but it's pretty easy to tell it to skip to the Nth entry.

Re:Activity time! (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19168743)

Ill Start
00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
  Lameness filter encountered.

Re:Activity time! (2, Informative)

Ksevio (865461) | more than 6 years ago | (#19168771)

with 18,446,744,073,709,551,616 numbers and we'll say 8 Bytes per number, that would be a 128 Exabyte file - not the most reasonable file to host all over the place

Re:Activity time! (1)

JensenDied (1009293) | more than 6 years ago | (#19169015)

we could have them host an extremely small program, or source file to generate this file rather than host the file itself.

Re:Activity time! (1)

Ant P. (974313) | more than 6 years ago | (#19168785)

But where are you going to find a mirror willing to host a file 2^132 bytes in size?

Re:Activity time! (1)

spaceyhackerlady (462530) | more than 6 years ago | (#19168863)

But where are you going to find a mirror willing to host a file 2^132 bytes in size?

Don't. Use a broadcast distribution like BitTorrent. Individuals broadcast portions of the keyspace, and others pick up the pieces they want.

Yeah, I know it's stupid and useless. But then so is AACS.

...laura

Re:Activity time! (1)

LehiNephi (695428) | more than 6 years ago | (#19168853)

Ummm....first of all, it's 32 hex digits, or 16 bytes.

Secondly, that would make a total of 2^128 different numbers, each 16 bytes long. So 16 * 2^128 = 5.44 * 10^39 bytes, or 5.1 * 10^30 GB. Good luck finding a hard drive with that capacity, let alone a web server with the bandwidth to transmit it.

Re:Activity time! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19169143)

I have some bad news.

That file would be: 128 bits of key, plus 8 bits of "\n", times 2 raised to the 128th power.
That works out to 136 x 2^128, or approximately 40,140,115,104,391,984,316,416 Exabytes (Exabyte is 1024 Petabytes, which is 1024 Terabytes, which is 1024 Gigabytes - but you already knew that)

Unfortnately today's storage media are not capable of storing 40 million quadrillion Exabytes of data.

Binary's a bitch ;)

more like "calls DRM, period, into question." (4, Interesting)

swschrad (312009) | more than 6 years ago | (#19168667)

you have folks designing a roadblock into the process of decoding media, that doesn't always work, that is not supported on any of the minority OS... and they wonder why other folks keep cracking it?

you think maybe somebody out there in MogulLand would look at the swirling Warez underground, and for once think maybe, "geez, the free market says we are bumbling goons?"

apparently it only happens in Britain, where somebody at Electric Music Industries Ltd. woke up sober and straight one morning...

Re:more like "calls DRM, period, into question." (4, Funny)

Minwee (522556) | more than 6 years ago | (#19169157)

"Somebody at Electric Music Industries Ltd. woke up sober and straight one morning..."

After having gone to bed the night before drunken and bi-curious?

I have a truly marvellous key of this revision (2, Funny)

sectionboy (930605) | more than 6 years ago | (#19168687)

... which this internet is too narrow to contain.

Re:I have a truly marvellous key of this revision (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19168871)

God damn it, I keep telling Comcast to widen our tubes.

Problem with the people who enforce the DRM (3, Insightful)

LittleBigScript (618162) | more than 6 years ago | (#19168723)

They are not just up against a determined people. They are up against SMART, determined people. These are the kind of people who will circumvent a problem before circle a petition.

The AACS LA is really fighting a losing battle on this one. The question I have to ask is where and when are they going to cut their losses.

Re:Problem with the people who enforce the DRM (1)

nikostheater (956769) | more than 6 years ago | (#19168921)

The funny thing is that MAFIAA will never learn... Sometime in the future they 'll talk about some new "unhackable drm" and such bullshit...meanwhile,everybody else they will laugh at them watching their pirate copy of The Matrix....

AACS is done (4, Insightful)

Jugalator (259273) | more than 6 years ago | (#19168775)

I don't think hackers are always going to publically tell which software they found vulnerable, or if they went for the hardware, or exactly what. But it's quite clear they now understand where to look for the keys, so just changing them won't help anymore. And when you know the protection structure, I think this system is now pretty much as busted as the DVD protection became. GG

Cost Functions (4, Insightful)

SlashdotOgre (739181) | more than 6 years ago | (#19168839)

It amazes me that the movie industry remains convinced that they save more money by developing and implementing DRM than they would lose to piracy. The cost for a system like AACS must have been well into the millions, and I hope they realize that with all DRM systems it takes orders of magnitude less money to bypass them then it does to create them (and once a crack is known, that's all it takes). At the very best, DRM only buys them some time until it is cracked, and at worst is frustrates consumers to the point that they boycott the product. While the number of pirates may increase a bit if all media was DRM free, I don't believe it would be a significant increase from the amount who pirate now. I do believe the amount lost to new piracy would be less than the amount spent developing DRM, and perhaps the increase in sales due to people who only pirate because they hate DRM will off set that even more.

Obligatory (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19168849)

Nelson: Ha Ha!

your likeness will be added to our own (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19168927)

The hacker collective continues to adapt to AACS revisions and is demonstrating a capacity to assimilate new volume keys at a rate which truly reveals the futility of resistance.


It is with great pleasure I welcome our new borg overlords.

If you're gonna try to get ahead of the curve, (1)

iceT (68610) | more than 6 years ago | (#19168961)

you still need to be faster than the internet. The hacks get around faster than you can follow.

Good luck with that.

How Much $ has this cost Sony and Toshiba so far ? (1)

speedlaw (878924) | more than 6 years ago | (#19169017)

While I'm not one of them..... This target will attract the best and the brightest, for the challenge of the hack. The successful person will post results in such a way that he/she cannot be traced. The DRM model fails-even for the mildly informed computer user. (Those who open unknown attachments will always be with us) Meanwhile, with two incompatable formats, my money stays in my wallet. How much money have Sony and Toshiba lost on this debacle so far ? I must admit I am very entertained by this...although not on my TV set !

Umm... (5, Insightful)

fyrwurxx (907932) | more than 6 years ago | (#19169103)

I never understood the MPAA/RIAA's approach to curbing piracy and increasing legitimate sales by imposing restrictions on those who pay for content. Think about it: a pirated album or movie comes with zero DRM and thus can be used for any purpose on any player an unlimited number of times. If I pay for that same album and purchase it through iTunes, I can only listen to it on my computer and my iPod. So here's my choice: pay for restricted content or download DRM-free content FOR free. Umm, who in their right mind would elect for the former?

A more proactive approach to curbing piracy would not restrict the rights of the consumer, but expand them. Instead of pouring millions of dollars into encryption schemes that are cracked before they're released, invest that money into innovations like exclusive or pre-release content for paying customers. I might feel better about buying an album online if a) I knew I could use that album any way I want and b) got a little extra in return, like an interview with the band, an exclusive track, preferential treatment for concert tickets, or whatever. I know these exclusive tracks and interviews could just as easily be pirated, but it's the thought that counts. If you (the RIAA/MPAA) respect my right and desire to use my movies and music how I want, I'll be more likely to respect your right to compensation for said goods. Either way, putting digital handcuffs on your paying customers is definitely *not* the right approach.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...