Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Movies Media Encryption Security Software

First AACS Blu-Ray/HD-DVD Key Revoked 254

Posted by CowboyNeal
from the changing-the-locks dept.
Thomas Charron writes "An update posted for Intervideo WinDVD 8 confirms that it's AACS key has been possibly revoked. WinDVD 8 is the software which had its device key compromised, allowing unfettered access to Blu-Ray and HD-DVD content, resulting in HD movies being made available via many torrent sites online. This is possibly the first known key revocation which has taken place, and little is known of the actual process used for key revocation. According to the release, 'Please be aware that failure to apply the update will result in AACS-protected HD DVD and BD playback being disabled,' which pretty much confirms that the key revocation has already taken place for all newly released Blu-Ray and HD-DVD discs."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

First AACS Blu-Ray/HD-DVD Key Revoked

Comments Filter:
  • by yagu (721525) * <[moc.liamg] [ta] [ugayay]> on Saturday April 07, 2007 @10:54AM (#18646729) Journal

    I don't completely understand what's going on here. And that's exactly my point. I don't want to understand. Does this breach disable any user's player until they update their hardware? Will some disks play and others not? (I'm kind of making this up, but I'm role-playing what most consumers are experiencing based on my limited anecdotal observations).

    I don't want to know the ins and outs of the security of the media. I want it to work like the old CD players. I insert a disk, I watch a movie. Simple. Easy. Done.

    I think above and beyond the hurdle of introducing a new format, ahem, two new formats, for DVDs this kind of hiccup could be fatal to the rollout. People are annoyed enough with little things (cables plugged in wrong way, audio/video receivers improperly configured, etc.), when it comes to having to update firmware to be able to play stuff they've paid for, they're going to be mad. And maybe some, maybe many are going to rethink their upgrade plans and find regular DVD okay enough. And maybe people who have been considering HD DVD will stay away in droves. Fingers crossed.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Gossi (731861)
      What this means is that *NEW* HD-DVD and Bluray discs won't work on old players, unless patched. It's a consumer nightmare as they won't know nor care about HD-DVD piracy -- they just want a disc which works.



      Put simply: industry + clueless = idiots who damage their own profits. The music industry has proven this well already -- now it's time for the movie industry to not learn from the past.

      • by scottnews (237707) on Saturday April 07, 2007 @11:26AM (#18647067)
        It means *NEW* HD-DVD and Bluray discs won't work on WinDVD 8. The key for WinDVD 8 has been revoked. Other players use different keys. Those have not been revoked. WinDVD has released a free update with a new key, and presumably an attempt to encrypt it.

        This is why HD-DVD and Bluray players require a network jack. It allows for old keys to be removed and new ones to be implemented, among other things.

        • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

          by smchris (464899)
          Count me confused too. So what will be _really_ cool (anarchy-wise) will be when people release hacks for consumer media hardware of the future the way people hack game consoles to play linux? How do they tell what hardware has been conpromised? Each Blu-Ray disk comes with an explicit agreement to let the industry probe your hardware?

      • by Kjella (173770) on Saturday April 07, 2007 @11:39AM (#18647199) Homepage
        What this means is that *NEW* HD-DVD and Bluray discs won't work on old players, unless patched.

        Actually:
        1. New discs won't play on the players who has had their keys revoked. Just to make that clear, this only has any effect for users of the WinDVD software player.
        2. If I remember correctly, the player will keep a version of the revocation keys. So from what I've understood, once you put in a disc which says "Hey, you're supposed to be revoked" that player will stop working until you get an upgrade.

        For a software player, this isn't more than what it just said - a required software update. It doesn't get nasty until hardware keys are found...
        • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

          by LarsG (31008)
          If I remember correctly, the player will keep a version of the revocation keys. So from what I've understood, once you put in a disc which says "Hey, you're supposed to be revoked" that player will stop working until you get an upgrade.

          Ouch. Imagine all the damage an enterprising anti-DRM vigilante can do if revocation lists can be faked. Or a SNAFU in the manufacturing plant.
        • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

          by evilviper (135110)

          once you put in a disc which says "Hey, you're supposed to be revoked" that player will stop working until you get an upgrade.

          This myth appears to have originated simply by a reporter from The Register misunderstanding an out-of-context quote, from someone who didn't entirely understand AACS to begin with.

          Reading about AACS from the source, I didn't see anything like this at all. So please stop spreading bullshit myths.

          And don't drink coke while you're eating pop rocks, or your stomach will explode, and yo

          • by SiliconEntity (448450) on Saturday April 07, 2007 @01:42PM (#18648369)
            once you put in a disc which says "Hey, you're supposed to be revoked" that player will stop working until you get an upgrade.
            This myth appears to have originated...

            It's not a myth at all. Try reading section 4.8 of the AACS Introduction and Common Cryptographic Elements [aacsla.com] spec:

            An AACS licensed drive shall retain in non-volatile storage, the most recent Host Revocation List (HRL) data which it encounters and has verified. To do this, for the first AACS drive authentication to the media inserted, the drive shall read an MKB recorded on the media to check if its version is higher than the version of HRL that it has stored in its non-volatile memory... If the version of MKB recorded on the media is higher than the version of HRL that the drive has stored in its non volatile memory, the drive verifies the signature in the Host Revocation List Record of MKB as specified in section 3.2.5.2. If the signature is successfully verified, the drive shall replace the previously stored HRL data, if any, with the newly read HRL data.
            What this means is that disks are distributed with Host Revocation Lists on them, cryptographically signed by AACS. Whenever a disk is inserted, the drive checks to see if the HRL on the disk is newer than the one it has in nonvolatile memory, and if so, it checks the AACS signature on the new one and stores it in memory. This allows a drive to refuse to talk to a given host software. Likewise there is a drive revocation list that the hosts are supposed to hold which tells them not to talk to certain drive versions, in case an attack is found in some models of drives.
            • What this means is that disks are distributed with Host Revocation Lists on them, cryptographically signed by AACS. Whenever a disk is inserted, the drive checks to see if the HRL on the disk is newer than the one it has in nonvolatile memory, and if so, it checks the AACS signature on the new one and stores it in memory. This allows a drive to refuse to talk to a given host software. Likewise there is a drive revocation list that the hosts are supposed to hold which tells them not to talk to certain drive

            • by whyde (123448) on Saturday April 07, 2007 @03:48PM (#18649635)
              When I first became aware of AACS, I read what I could of the spec and pondered whether it would be possible to produce and distribute a disc which deliberately uses the properties of NVM and the MKB/HRL specification to insert a bogus "maximum value" HRL which contains a do-nothing (or nothing useful) revocation list.

              The net result of this is, once inserted, the disc guarantees that all future discs will play regardless of the player codes which have ever been, or will ever be, revoked. Since it has no concept of time except for the supposedly monotonically increasing version numbers of the HRL, it should be possible to max out the HRL value so no disc can ever update the player's revocation list.

              I'd be suprised to find out that this is not possible.
              • by Skreems (598317) on Saturday April 07, 2007 @08:28PM (#18651681) Homepage
                It's not. Or more specifically, not in the way you want.

                Storing the revocation list like this is likely only useful so that the device can give the user specific instructions to go look for an update, and maybe disable itself even for older discs. Every new disc will still fail to provide a disc key to the player, as the player key will not be included in the tree of allowed ones. You still couldn't play new discs, the best you might do is prevent the player from understanding that it needs an upgrade.
            • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

              by Erpo (237853)

              once you put in a disc which says "Hey, you're supposed to be revoked" that player will stop working until you get an upgrade.

              This myth appears to have originated...

              It's not a myth at all. Try reading section 4.8 of the AACS Introduction and Common Cryptographic Elements spec

              It isn't a myth, but Host Revocation and Drive Revocation are trivial to bypass and are not what is being described in this article.

              HRLs and DRLs only serve to stop Hosts (PCs) and drives (HD-DVD or Blu-Ray) from communicating with ea

      • by JWW (79176)
        Yep, I think this might answer the whole question of which format will win question....

        The answer is neither....

        When screw the customer is one of the FEATURES of a product the people selling it are #$#$%$% morons!

    • by jfengel (409917) on Saturday April 07, 2007 @11:13AM (#18646931) Homepage Journal
      It should be a lot more difficult to get the keys for a hardware player than for a software player. WinDVD made an easy target because it is running on a general-purpose computer, which means that the key is sitting there in memory at some point to be snooped out. It's not easy, I'm sure, to find that key among the many megabytes of code, but it's there.

      A hardware player isn't a general purpose computer. I'm sure it's possible for somebody with the right hardware to snoop inside its memory (say, inserting a special thingamabob between the memory and the mother board that allows you to read all reads/writes as they go past), but it's not going to be readily available.

      Presumably somebody will be the first one to do this, and that is sure going to be a bad day for both formats. People are prepared to upgrade their software; it happens all the time and it's a relatively painless process for most people. Upgrading your hardware is not going to be easy, and it may not even be possible. (I used to own a DVD player which was "upgraded" by downloading a patch, burning it onto a CD, and putting that in the machine, but I don't know if every DVD player supports that.)

      If they start denying keys on hardware players, there will be a world of pain, but I don't expect this to shatter the world. They'll just advise everybody to download a patch with a new key.
      • by d-rock (113041)
        And then they'll either hack the patch to get the new key or use the same method they used to extract the original key to get the new one...
      • by Ironsides (739422)
        It should be a lot more difficult to get the keys for a hardware player than for a software player.

        Only if you try to get the key directly from the hardware player. I remember reading with DeCSS on the standard DVDs, that the keys were guessable by a human once they found a pattern in them. While they are using 128bit encryption for Blu-Ray and HD-DVD and DVD only used 40 bit, they still use multiple keys for unlocking the content, effectively reducing the number of bits by who knows how many. It's p
        • by pyite (140350)
          they still use multiple keys for unlocking the content, effectively reducing the number of bits by who knows how many. It's possible that once enough keys are found, a smart brute-force of the keyspace could be executed that would find all the keys.

          It's simply unlikely. AES' 128 bits is too much, and the algorithm has been shown to be too secure at present. It's a highly critiqued algorithm that has been proven not highly vulerable to known techniques of cryptanalysis. AES has a highly mathematic structure
      • by DeadCatX2 (950953) on Saturday April 07, 2007 @01:04PM (#18647993) Journal
        Unfortunately, you're assuming that the memory holding the key is in a separate chip from the processor which will use it. These days, it's common for chips to have internal non-volatile storage (Flash). I bet (note: speculation) one of the design goals for AACS was to ensure that the key was never in-flight on a PCB trace. You can't probe a signal if it's routed internally in the silicon, never leaving the chip.
        • by Cassini2 (956052) on Saturday April 07, 2007 @04:29PM (#18650057)

          You can't probe a signal if it's routed internally in the silicon, never leaving the chip.
          Keeping a signal "locked" in the silicon is more difficult than one would like to think. Most of the chips with built in non-volatile memory have built-in interfaces to program that memory. These interfaces can be abused, and people have done it. Microchip's secure chips were breached. I am not sure where the hackers are at with the latest 32-bit and 64-bit hardware. It is hard to make something that "no one can copy". It is really hard when no physical security is present. People can remove the chips from the players and expose them to out-of-spec signals and voltage levels to find out what happens next.
      • by evilviper (135110) on Saturday April 07, 2007 @01:08PM (#18648035) Journal

        A hardware player isn't a general purpose computer.

        Actually, it is. Toshiba's first HD-DVD players are, in fact, Pentium 4 computers.

        (I used to own a DVD player which was "upgraded" by downloading a patch, burning it onto a CD, and putting that in the machine, but I don't know if every DVD player supports that.)

        Not ALL, but the vast majority of DVD players can be flashed in the same manner.
      • Presumably somebody will be the first one to do this, and that is sure going to be a bad day for both formats. People are prepared to upgrade their software; it happens all the time and it's a relatively painless process for most people.

        I don't have the link readily available, I think the actual paper may have been pulled from the web and thus only available on the wayback machine, but AACS has the ability to revoke individual players.

        In a nutshell the way it works is that players do not have just a single

  • Awesome (Score:5, Funny)

    by Vexorian (959249) on Saturday April 07, 2007 @10:54AM (#18646737)
    No one can deny how convenient this is for the customers. The companies love us.
    • Thank you for using the word "customers" instead of "consumers." Consumers are force-fed; customers have a choice.

      But therein lies the problem with this situation. The **AA cartels have purchased the necessary legislation to reinforce their monopolies. When they revoke a DRM key that effectively bricks your hardware player for future media releases, what are you going to do? They've cost-shifted the upgrade burden onto you, and since they own the entire distribution chain, you can't take your business
      • and if people just refuse to buy the product, they'll but legislation that gives them a hefty subsidy to 'protect a core intellectual property industry'. Meaning we all pay, but now don't get a product either. Ah corruption - can't beat it (literally).
      • This is a perfect example of why monopolies are bad. This will resonate all the way down to Joe Sixpack in a form that he'll understand - "Damned 'new' movies don't play in my DVD player." He may not understand the ins and outs of DRM legislation, but he sure as hell knows what getting screwed by the establishment means.

        And the establishment will respond thus:

        Yeah, that copy protection sure is painful, huh? Goddamn those freedom hating movie pirates for making us put it on there. You know those guys f
  • let's have a vote (Score:3, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 07, 2007 @10:56AM (#18646755)
    How many of you like to have your computers controlled by media corporations and Microsoft? Voting time is now. http://defectivebydesign.org/ [defectivebydesign.org]
    • by RightSaidFred99 (874576) on Saturday April 07, 2007 @12:11PM (#18647513)
      You know, it's the damnedest thing. My computer is controlled by me. Everytime I see people whining about DRM I wonder what the fuss is. I run Windows XP and have had no issues with DRM because I don't buy DRM'd media. Instead of whining, I just put my money where my mouth is and so far I haven't fallen asleep cursing Microsoft or anyone else because I don't have any DRM issues to speak of. It's God Damned amazing.
      • by Dare nMc (468959)

        have had no issues with DRM because I don't buy DRM'd media.

        I have only bought 3 un-cracked DRM'd media, I have plenty of DVD's but their cracked, so no worries they load up on my media player with just a couple clicks, and a hour later it'll be loaded on my player whenever it is next turned on.

        odds are that what you meant as well, you purchase no DRM'd content that is still effective.

        FYI, of those 3 I bought, 1 I never got anything to work (e-book), the other 2 I got video only, no sound (HD content on DV

      • It still isn't a problem if you choose to run Vista. Turns out that the DRM in Vista isn't composed of little DRM gremlins that go and encrypt your media when you sleep. If you don't get media that is DRM'd, you aren't aware of it at all. Monitors without HDCP work just fine, HD video works just fine, MP3 encoding works just fine, etc. I'm sure that there might be issues if I decided to get media protected by the new DRM, but I'm also sure that it is my option not to. I can continue to use what I always hav
        • by BFaucet (635036)
          Wait until your parents or a friend of yours asks you to help them get their HD-DVD to play on their system. Most folks are going to be completely oblivious until after they've dropped a lot of money on stuff that just won't work. At that point they've already invested a lot and will probably just take it up the ass and buy some more so the stuff they already purchased will be of some use.

      • That's nice for you. You happen to be an informed consumer. Unfortunately, you're one of a rare breed. Average consumers don't know squat about DRM key revocations on next-gen media; all they know is that BlueRay is "better" than DVD, so they go out and buy it, without knowing how much control the media companies have over their new purchase.

        Due to the ignorance of the average consumer, DRM products become widespread, and, within a few years, become a defacto standard. Now it's too late, both for the educat
  • soo.... (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward
    so if WinDVD 8's AACS key gets banned, basically all WinDVD 8 has to do is issue a patch to give it a new key, so that future discs will work? seems like that would be something that would be hackable and exploitable... especially if other aacs keys are known, i imagine hacks would come out to change the program's aacs key to any known unblocked aacs key...

    it's entirely possible that i have this all wrong.
  • by uncleFester (29998) on Saturday April 07, 2007 @11:03AM (#18646811) Homepage Journal
    this is what's more curious to me.. when/if a hardware player ever is compromised, what are you gonna do then? the content owner denies your access to their content.. you think the manufacturer will step up with an "oops, our bad; here's a new unit to play stuff.." har.

    i don't even know if this has happened with dvd or how possible it is.. but i have to think the potential is out there, and unless the unit has some sort of design foresight to resolve some issue (firmware updates to my bluRay player? and what kinda new 'security' hole is that?!?) i'd think you could be toast. .. that might actually be one class-action suit i could hop on and enjoy, just to watch potential legal fallout. :)

    -r
  • Copyedit? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by interiot (50685) on Saturday April 07, 2007 @11:03AM (#18646817) Homepage
    Can't Slashdot do a minimal amount of copyediting to stories before posting them?

    An update posted for Intervideo WinDVD 8 confirms that it's AACS key has been possibly revoked. WinDVD 8 is the software which had it's device key compromised,
    "Possibly" "confirmed" appears on its face as a likely contradiction, and it is... the linked article says "please be aware that failure to apply the update will result in AACS-protected HD DVD and BD playback being disabled".
    • Re:Copyedit? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 07, 2007 @11:07AM (#18646851)
      ... and for G*d's sake, it's "its," not "it's"!

      (World's easiest job: slashdot "editor.")
    • by Dogtanian (588974)

      Can't Slashdot do a minimal amount of copyediting to stories before posting them? "Possibly" "confirmed" appears on its face as a likely contradiction
      CowboyNeal reports that Slashdot will "definitely maybe" take up your suggestion. Noel Gallagher unavailable for comment.
  • hardware players? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by MoOsEb0y (2177) on Saturday April 07, 2007 @11:05AM (#18646837)
    What are the implications for hardware players? Will they now need to be updated, or does this key revocation only apply for WinDVD in particular. If so, does this mean that it would be possible to hack apart a hardware HDDVD/Bluray player and take its key? This doesn't seem like a very secure system if that kind of attack is possible.
    • by Kjella (173770)
      What are the implications for hardware players?

      None.

      would [it] be possible to hack apart a hardware HDDVD/Bluray player and take its key?

      Nobody's done it, but if it happened they coudl revoke that key. Of course, if you found a way to extract it from a class of players, they might have to recall all those players.
      • by bhima (46039)
        Doubtless, a update could be achieved with a properly written DVD.

        Still I'd love to see the necessity.
  • Great! (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Bri3D (584578) on Saturday April 07, 2007 @11:06AM (#18646847) Journal
    And the update must have the new key in it!
    And we know how smart InterVideo have been about protecting the keys so far...

    The fact of the matter is that if it can be decrypted and the user has physical access, there is *no way* to make "unbreakable" DRM. None. At all.
    Especially on most modern CPU architectures where memory and the bus are unencrypted. The data *has* to go through RAM and over the bus.
    Therefore there *is no protection*
    It takes *one* decrypt to defeat their supposed purpose "keeping them dirty pirates from getting it" and this decrypt will *always* happen. But yet they waste millions in R+D money making ridiculously bad systems to try to prevent something that's physically impossible to prevent.
    • Does anyone seriously doubt that there will be a day-zero crack of the new keys?

    • Re:Great! (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Nasarius (593729) on Saturday April 07, 2007 @11:21AM (#18647023)
      And the clever cracking groups will grab a key and not tell anyone, just keep using it to make releases. It'll be amusing to watch and see what happens, though. Will they keep playing whack-a-mole when they can find which key has been extracted? Will they finally realize it's just not worth the effort? Or will they end up revoking all software player keys and forcing you to buy and use the hardware players? I'm betting on the latter.
      • by julesh (229690)
        Or will they end up revoking all software player keys and forcing you to buy and use the hardware players? I'm betting on the latter.

        They can try it if they want to face a class action from everyone who's bought an HDDVD drive for their PC. I still don't see that intentionally and specifically disabling somebody's property can be legal.
      • Or will they end up revoking all software player keys and forcing you to buy and use the hardware players? I'm betting on the latter.

        I know that Microsoft has the Xbox 360 with the HD-DVD add-on drive, but surely they might have a bit of incentive to be in the "media centre" market where Vista is the focus of an HD home theatre? If there are only "hardware" solutions, they would be shut out. Could Microsoft afford that?
    • by d-rock (113041)
      Exactly. I'm interested in how Corel is protecting the new key it's trying to distribute. I mean, if they can hack the AACS key out of the player why do they think that they won't break the update to get the new key? Even if they're using some sort of public/private key pair embedded in the software, that too should be easily extracted. I'd wager that the new key will be available very soon.

      Derek
    • by Lumpy (12016)
      You are missing the fun part. Every one of these they do gets us closer to completely cracking it. and once they do we can have the entire pool of keys on a disc and that will kill their ability right there.
    • by evilviper (135110)

      there is *no way* to make "unbreakable" DRM. None. At all.

      There's no way to make DRM unbreakable IN SOFTWARE. However, even there, there are numerous ways to make it so ridiculously difficult to find the key, that it would either require millions of dollars in equipment and thousands of man-hours for each key (which can be trivially revoked) or perhaps waiting many years until technology improves, until they don't really care anymore if the DRM is broken.

      In hardware, however, DRM can be absolutely impossib

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by Bri3D (584578)
        Wrong. Why?

        The user still has to be able to *view* the content. There is no DRM for the mind (yet, hopefully ever).
        No matter how much fancy full-pipeline encrypted hardware you build, the user still has to see it. And our minds don't support AES.
        • by r3m0t (626466)
          That's true, but a lot of quality is lost in a re-recording. That's ignoring the possibility of legislation outlawing cameras or requiring cameras to comply with copy protection in video.

          Which is better? (Consider video but ignore sound.)

          1) A DVD rip from filesharing networks.
          2) The movie from an HD-DVD which has been projected onto a (HDCP) display, recorded with an HD camcorder on a tripod, compressed and uploaded to filesharing networks.

          The DVD rip, of course. The movie studios, in this scenario, have wo
          • by Bri3D (584578)
            How about the video that's been re-encoded in good quality off the analog signal that *has* to exist in a monitor/projector (hell, if the DRM got bad/"good" enough well-funded groups i.e. chinese organized piracy groups could make devices that reconstructed signals off of LCD crystal drivers)?
            Still not optimal, sure, and sure the studios have won a tiny victory, but it's still guaranteed to be better than SD.

            Then there's the fact that to make a system "secure" up to that point requires integrating the crypt
        • by evilviper (135110)

          No matter how much fancy full-pipeline encrypted hardware you build, the user still has to see it.

          No. Everyone is quick to talk about pointing a video camera at a screen, but it's expensive to get HD equipment, works pretty badly in practice (eg. refresh rate, black level, etc.), and with the quality loss, you might be better off just copying the DVD version instead.

          But additionally, a electronic eye sees things very differently than human eyes. There are numerous methods to make moving images look perfec

  • by denmarkw00t (892627) on Saturday April 07, 2007 @11:17AM (#18646985) Homepage Journal
    ...and certainly not the last. Beware, HD-DVD/Blu-Ray consumers, you're in for a bumby road of software patches and exploits that move twice as fast!
  • by Moridineas (213502) on Saturday April 07, 2007 @11:38AM (#18647181) Journal
    "confirms that it's AACS key has been possibly revoked"

    Well, I'm glad that's been confirmed...
  • by supabeast! (84658) on Saturday April 07, 2007 @11:46AM (#18647249)
    If anyone really wants to piss off Sony, start a PS3 Linux project to build a PS3-based supercomputer that can be used to crack all of the Blu-Ray keys.
  • ...VideoCipher II?
    As quick as the satellite broadcasters changed keys, the hackers would crack and distribute them.
  • What happens when they release a new version of the software that you have to pay for? Say someone then cracks V8 again, will they release a free update or will everyone be expected to pay for V9 in order to watch new movies?
  • right of first sale? (Score:2, Interesting)

    by mrcubehead (693754)
    I was wondering, what if you bought a commercial disk and made a copy without protection (via copy circumvention in a country where fair use isn't demolished by the dmca, like in sweden), and then destroyed the original, and resold it as a "drm-free" version? No one can argue the content has changed... so doesn't this then fall under the right of first sale, which was upheld by the supreme court some time ago?
    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by ThePhilips (752041)

      Since you are selling not original - but copy - no way it would classify as "first sale". IOW, private copies are reserved for private use - sale/rent/etc aren't private uses.

      P.S. IANAL

In seeking the unattainable, simplicity only gets in the way. -- Epigrams in Programming, ACM SIGPLAN Sept. 1982

Working...