Slashdot Mirror


MS DRM Version 2 - Cracked

As the title says: Microsoft Digital Rights Management Version 2 has been cracked. The Register has the story, including a link to a downloadable zip file which contains source code, explanation and a small DOS utility. Grab it while you can. You can also read the explanation directly here, and you can also find it with Google.

4 of 348 comments (clear)

  1. A mirror for the zip by Mik!tAAt · · Score: 5, Informative

    Here's a mirror to the .zip file. Hope it helps.

    --
    This is the place where you write something that will make you seem like a complete idiot.
  2. Re:Nice by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    >I hate to say it, but it's illegal according to the DCMA, to reverse engineer and distribute the code. But,
    >since I don't give a fuck about the DCMA, I'll be downloading too.

    In the US, yes... the Reg resides in the UK and the EU "Council Directive 91/250/EEC of 14 May 1991 on the legal protection of computer programs" states the following:

    Article 6 Decompilation
    1. The authorization of the rightholder shall not be required where reproduction of the code and translation of its form within the meaning of Article 4 (a) and (b) are indispensable to obtain the information necessary to achieve the interoperability of an independently created computer program with other programs...

    By putting it on its own server Reg is pretty much trolling Microsofts legal department. Way to go!

    JK

  3. Re:Fair use: a birth right? by firewort · · Score: 5, Informative

    Much of fair use comes from 17 USC 107:

    Sec. 107. Limitations on exclusive rights: Fair use

    Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 106 and 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include -

    (1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether
    such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit
    educational purposes;
    (2) the nature of the copyrighted work;
    (3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in
    relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
    (4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or
    value of the copyrighted work. The fact that a work is unpublished shall not itself bar a finding of fair use if such finding is made upon consideration of all the above factors.

    The rest of fair use comes from tradition. What is codified here, we need to fight to protect. What rights we assert from tradition, we need to fight harder to codify.

    --

  4. Not, it won't by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 5, Informative

    The thing is that before a peice of software can be used, music be listened to, etc it MUST be decrypted. You can have all the stong crypto you like, it has to be in an unencrypted format before it's usable. Ok well this means that all the components necessary to decrypt it and make it usable must be included. You can mess around and obfuscate all you like, in the end your software still has to be able to decrypt the program so it can be run, and that means the hackers can trace through your code and find out what you are doing and how to do it themselves.

    This is how all the SafeDisc unwrappers and the like work. They get all their info from the very files SafeDisc uses, extracts the necessary info, and then unwraps the .exe and gives it to you. The only difference between it and the real SafeDisc is that SafeDisc unwraps the program to memory and runs ut each time, these crackers unwrap it and write it to disc, so you can use it whenever you like without copyprotection.

    The reason why encryption is normally secure is it assumes two trusted parites. If I send something encrypted to you, it is assumed that you have the necessary means to decrypt it and that is what I want you to do. For example suppose you and I regularly encrypt our stuff with a semetric encryption algroithm like Blowfish. We both have a key that we use to talk to eachother. We both know this key, but nobody else does. In that way we can lock the data so that only we are able to unlock it. Well this only works because I WANT you to be able to decrypt the data. Well with copy protection the idea is they DON'T want you to be able to see the data, so they encrypt it. Problem is, your processor needs it decrypted. That means they HAVE to give you the key to decrypt it. They can hide it and obfuscate it, but it has to be there, otherwise it doesn't do any good. Well, that means you can find it, and use it to unlock the data they sent you.