HD DVD's AACS Protection Bypassed

Mr. BS writes "Playfuls.com is running a story how HD DVD's AACS protection has been compromised. Although the video of the hack leaves much to be desired, the source code has already been made available. Feel free to start backing up your HD DVD's whenever you feel the need."

Ironically.. probably a boost for the format

[Maxo-Texas]

the mfg's won't understand of course.

Par for the course

[fireproofjew]

Every encryption/DRM scheme that the companies think up will inevitably be cracked/hacked. All they need to do is realize that and then they can save money instead of pursuing a futile effort. I, for one, would buy the stuff if it was worth the money they charge.

Maybe they could charge less if they didn't take the time or spend the money developing newer DRM?

Hello? Article submitter?

[Jugalator]

Feel free to start backing up your HD DVD's whenever you feel the need

Not only do we skip RTFA quite often, the article submitters seem to as well.

What he says in that quote is simply not possible; you still need the keys, and that hack doesn't cover that problem.

We may have something for that too in the future, but this is not the hack for piracy-at-will.

Re:Par for the course

[arminw]

.....Maybe they could charge less if they didn't take the time or spend the money developing newer DRM........

Maybe the movie and music moguls are duped by the inventors and purveyors of these harebrained copy protection schemes. The latter KNOW that the laws of physics and mathematics GUARANTEE that *any* copy protection scheme WILL be broken. After all, in order to use the content, the key has to be given to the consumer in order to play it. There is NO way to hide a key, if it is needful to be able to use it at some point in order to view the movie or play the music. Perhaps some sane crypto expert can convince the content producers that they have been lied to by these crooked, money grabbing "experts" who know deep down that none of their schemes can ever work for long. The hollywood and the music industry have been sold the equivalent of a certain bridge labeled DRM by these companies who make money selling their DRM schemes to the content producers. Content makers would likely make more money if they did NOT pay these liars a dime.

Cost Effectiveness?

[I'll Provide The War]

Feel free to start backing up your HD DVD's whenever you feel the need.

Is it really cost-effective to do so at this point? HDDs seem to be at around $0.25/GB best case, so we are talking about $7+ per movie. That means 1/3 of your collection would have to be destroyed just to break even, assuming you value your time outside the office at $0/hr.

Maybe people are backing these up for other reasons such as skipping the 10 second FBI warning or saving the 20 seconds it takes to locate a disc and physically place it in the player?

I really don't see the utility, especially when giganews et al have 90 days retention now.

   

Re:Hey MPAA/RIAA cretins!

[fourchannel]

Fair use doesn't give you the right to break the encryption on copyrighted works.

Sure doesn't. But did you also know that copyright restrictions don't even apply in the first place if you are using the media for private use. Copyright only comes into play if someone is trying to publish the work of someone else. It's not even fair use to be able to do what you want to with your legally purchased DVD in your own home, in fact, that's just called plain old use.

No matter how much bullshit these companies try to control your every move, realize that once I purchase that little plastic disc, and go home, I can do whatever the fuck I want to, as long as what I do only stays in my own private house.

Now, on a completely different note, breaking encryption schemes falls under the long arm of the DMCA. My opinion of the DMCA is that the piece of legislation is not even worthy to wipe my ass with.

Universal availability

[symbolset]

If I paid for the content, I feel I'm entitled to play it when and where I want. That includes on my cell phone, my mp4 video player, streaming onto one of my pc's from my server, or even on a monitor that's attached with a VGA cable instead of a HDRM cable. And I feel I'm entitled to keep it safe from harm, watching the related movie while the shipping container disc is secure in its plastic box. I'm also entitled to watch just the content and skip the advertising, FBI threats, extras, menus and other crap that detract from the movie experience I paid for. Being threatened with prison for exercising my rights under fair use is distasteful to me, and doesn't leave me in a good mood to enjoy the dramatic experience.

People are backing these things up to their USB external HDDs so they can take their movies with them, or watch them how they like. The cracks for both of these formats will be available and people will transcode them to open formats. That's the way it is because the studios won't sell us content in the format we want, or their terms are otherwise unacceptable. I don't approve of people sharing the content with people who haven't paid for it, but, well, the penalty doesn't get any worse does it?

Oh, and usenet was cool once. I wonder what it's like to download a 25GB movie. That SSL encrypted subscription looks like a winner. Maybe it's time to look into that again.

Re:The source is not for the "break"

[Gyorg_Lavode]

Pretty simple. He identified the encrypted key. He probably debugged the player and looked for routines that accessed that part of thefile. When he found them he ran the routine and pulled it's output out of memory.

Re:Par for the course

[rob_squared]

The point has never been to make an unbreakable DRM scheme. The point is to use in in conjunction with the DMCA to get more control. DRM and the DMCA go together like bullets and handguns. The bullets (DRM) are useless themselves, but with the handgun (DMCA) they can get you to follow any restrictions they want.

Dance Dance Revocation

[tepples]

Pretty simple. He identified the encrypted key.

Which will be the first revoked key.

Re:Par for the course

[gutnor]

"The latter KNOW that the laws of physics and mathematics GUARANTEE that *any* copy protection scheme WILL be broken."

Ah, they don't want the protection to be completely unbreakable. They just want to make breaking the protection costing too much for average Joe to make copy of DVD to his friends.

The real value of a DVD for Joe user is something along the line of 20-50$ to purchase and will cost probably around 5$ to rent. If the protection is worth more than 5$ of pain for Joe user, then the mission is already a success. At 50$ worht of trouble, Joe will take its car to walmart and buy the DVD.

If Joe user cannot make an easy almost free copy, he needs to get it from
- P2P: Perfect, this channel is closely monitored by RIAA already. Moreover, the power of P2P is what allows the RIAA to buys mandatory taxes on blank CD/DVD in most countries.
- Lower quality copy with camcorder ? For people not interested in HD 'quality', there is VHS or DVD. So this side is also covered.

That's the same philosophy you use to secure your house. You don't build a bunker, but you put enough security in and around to make sure it is not worth the pain to break in.

Because 1201 nullifies 107, 108, 109, and 117

[tepples]

Unfortunately, there are any number of people in the world who feel perfectly empowered to illegally copy and distribute whatever material they want. What, exactly, are these people - who spend millions upon millions of dollars to generate this content (well, at least in the case of movies - music, apart from marketing, has relatively low overhead) - supposed to do to try to prevent this?

Unfortunately, there any number of people in the world who feel perfectly empowered to use litigation against others who reuse their material in critical ways, to withdraw material from distribution, and to make material that has been distributed useless. What, exactly, is the public - who spends millions upon millions to preserve this content - supposed to do to try to prevent this?

A problem occurs when the conditions imposed by digital restrictions management interfere with the public's right to make parodies and other fair uses that would be protected under 17 USC 107 were it not for 17 USC 1201. A problem occurs when the conditions imposed by digital restrictions management interfere with libraries' and archives' right to make backup copies that would be protected under 17 USC 108 were it not for 17 USC 1201. A problem occurs when the conditions imposed by digital restrictions management interfere with users' right to resell copies that would be protected under 17 USC 109 were it not for 17 USC 1201. A problem occurs when the conditions imposed by digital restrictions management interfere with users' right to platform-shift computer programs that would be protected under 17 USC 117 were it not for 17 USC 1201. If the MAFIAA wants to run a legit business, how can it help preserve the traditional balance between the rights of the copyright owner and the rights of users?

not as usefull as it sounds

[ILuvRamen]

I heard those discs can hold about 50GB so back them up all you want, you sure can't save more than a very few images. I'm not a big fan of disc to disc backups cuz the point is to back it up to a medium that isn't easily destroyed or scratched so maybe the best DRM is making the movie too big to save. Combine that with super-protection against players playing burned discs (or don't make a 'civilian' burner for the disc format at all) and movie pirating is over.