Claim of a Blu-ray BD+ Crack 307
Google85 writes in with a brief Enquirer piece reporting on an announcement on a German site that SlySoft claims to have cracked BD+, the extra copy-protection layer in Blu-ray. Here is the German original.
Problems? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:So i guess if true (Score:5, Interesting)
Just cracked? (Score:4, Interesting)
keeping people in a job... (Score:5, Interesting)
It's stupid...
Any digital content that can be seen or heard can be duplicated with some form of analog technology. Copy protected CD's can be recorded with near perfect quality simply by flying the audio from a CD player into a PC equipped with a $100 pro-level audio card (like the Emu 0404 or M-Audio Audiophile 2496). DRM protected mp3/wma/etc files can be duplicated through two pc's in exactly the same fashion as a CD. Copy protected DVD's can be duplicated by recording it's content from a DVD player into a PC with a decent video capture card.
And that's just the tip of it.
Nothing they do keeps DVD's off the streets. Every trip to the grocery store I make, I get a guy or gal coming up to me selling the latest movie for $10 on DVD (3 for $25!) or the latest yet-to-be-released CD for $5.
It's not going to stop. No amount of copy protection will help, no law passed will deter, it's a useless waste of money, but it keeps a few folks in a job.
Re:How to translate MPAA claims. (Score:5, Interesting)
1) AACS (currently we have ways to sniff the code out of software, cat and mouse game for now) (Cracked - sort of)
2) BD+ (The virtual machine decrypting the AACS content) (Cracked)
3) BD ROM MARK - A small key that has been stored on the cd using alternate technological means. This is an extra key that is read using only BLU RAY players using mysterious methods.
Without the BD ROM Mark the disk can't be decrypted quite yet.
The article makes no claim that this has been cracked.
Re:So i guess if true (Score:2, Interesting)
As of now there are no universal cracks in the wild for BD+ and no vulnerabilities were found in BD+ yet. The keys need to be cracked from a new software players version, every cycle of disk release. This doesn't make the scheme uncrackable, but it takes time to crack every time and that was the whole idea. It requires time, cannot be done computationally, and most importantly the work needs to be done every cycle of release.
If you read the doom9 forum, SlySoft explained that they cracked specific discs, and they said it took them 3 week to extract the keys from the software player. Now these keys will be revoked in the next cycle, and the software player they extract the keys from will have it's key revoked and will require an update. This update will use a new obscuring scheme for the keys, and it will require another 3 weeks to crack.
Re:How to translate MPAA claims. (Score:1, Interesting)
Can't be Done (Score:5, Interesting)
This just brings me back to my original hypothesis that it is impossible to encrypt something one time that you want to be easily distributed to the masses. There's just no way to say "here's the encrypted content and the key, but the key only works when we say so" unless you have some kind of root server doing the authentication in real-time and creates randomize keys for every download/view (think TSL). Even then, the user on the recieving end can (in theory) just record the incoming stream and redistribute.
It's time for the media distributors of the world to wise up and realize that they just cannot protect their content through DRM. The best they can hope for is to make it tough on Joe Sixpack, and rely on legal means to tackle the large scale pirates. (think 1980's style).
If BD+ is cracked, then the writing is pretty much on the wall for DVDs and we'll see a faster migration to online, streaming content. So let the "you cannot save this file" wars begin (ala Flash and QuickTime) - soon people (smarter than me) will spend time on fixing, er um... breaking that too.
AACS Encryption Getting Better? (Score:4, Interesting)
On the whole this is still a loss for the MPAA, but none the less being able to stop people for even a couple of weeks would likely encourage anxious people to buy movies they'd otherwise pirate, so it would seem the MPAA hasn't completely lost yet.
Re:Direct TV (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:So i guess if true (Score:3, Interesting)
Hmm... I guess I must not be keeping up with the changing definition of Pirate -- my immediate thought was, "wait a minute, the people mass producing the discs with the old code can still do so; the old code doesn't cease to be valid...." Then I realized you were talking about people ripping a legally purchased video to a DRM-less format, not people mass distributing discs for profit.
Seriously, I think the one thing this format has going for it is that unless the master copy is pirated and distributed in a DRM-less format, the MPAA members will have a window with each release where the market won't be flooded with free versions of their product, so people who want "zero-day" entertainment will be more likely to see it on TV/in the theatre/buy the DVD.
Re:They're sometimes not that bright... (Score:3, Interesting)
Or
That's the reason why people (ok, geeks) loathe DRM. It's not that we have to buy movies, I buy movies I enjoy enough to watch them more than just once (so far there's been three). But I want to watch them the way I want.
Re:So i guess if true (Score:1, Interesting)
It can be extremely satisfying successfully cracking something, especially if you're the first to do it.
Re:Direct TV (Score:1, Interesting)
Repeat after me:
There is no way to control data after it was given away until you can control all equipment
that the data passes (including the human brain). It will not work. Never. Ever. No way.
You can not give data away and at the same time not give up control over it.
Jesus...