New "Secure" Xbox Cracked In Under A Week

ilsie writes "Numbnut says it all in his post at xboxhacker.net. To quote his post, 'On behalf of the Xbox Linux Team, I am proud to announce that at 10:45BST the 'v1.1' secure version of the Xbox was proven to be running arbitrary BIOS code in a normal 256KByte modchip - with no additional hardware required. In short, in under a week we were able to normalize the new box to enable it to interoperate with Linux properly.'"

Comments

EULA changes?

[KernelHappy]

By any chance, has anyone checked to see if Microsoft modified the EULA when they released the new version of the Xbox? It would be interesting if they stuck anything in there that would strengthen their ability to prosecute and/or seek damages for circumvention of the protection scheme.

Re:EULA changes?

[Anonymous Coward]

Stop being anal with EULAs. If you violate an EULA, you're just voiding the warranty.

Re:EULA changes?

[i_luv_linux]

They don't have to change EULA, they already have that right under different laws.

Don't get exited about these news, they are for amusement only.

Re:EULA changes?

[afidel]

Sorry but reverse engineering is pretty well established, if it wasn't then modern pc's wouldn't exist as Compaq would not have been able to reverse engineer the IBM bios and AMD would not have been able to reverse engineer the Intel CPU. Now they could try to come after them with the DMCA, but AFAIK these mod chips do not allow access to any protected content, but rather allow you to run arbitrary software on the hardware

Re:EULA changes?

[Shelled]

It never occurred to me until reading the last sentence of your post, doesn't this in essence give Microsoft (and others) the power to create law? By standing behind EULAs it could be argued that governments give corporations a blank cheque to create legislation. "Put it in your EULA and we'll enforce it." (My EULA: IANAL)

Re:EULA changes?

[Anonymous Coward]

AMD didn't reverse engineer Intel's CPUs. They used to work together on processors.

Re:EULA changes?

[Anonymous Coward]

...anything in there that would strengthen their ability to prosecute and/or seek damages for circumvention of the protection scheme.

I hope not, its my right to take back at least one xbox after I mess up soldering in the mod chip.

Re:EULA changes?

[interiot]

Yes, that's definitely a desired attribute of contract law. Since laws that are on the book won't ever be able to cover everything or be able to keep up with the variety of private interactions that can occur that would need legal coverage, private parties can both agree to specific terms that go beyond what's explictely on the books. There is a limit to how extreme contracts can get (eg. you can't say that if you don't hold up your end of the agreement, that the other person gets to kill you), but there's a wide area there for "creating law".

Re:EULA changes?

[alienw]

The reason modchips don't fall under the DMCA is because they don't bypass access controls. The dmca defines protection devices as something that "effectively controls access to a work". Since you can't access data on a game CD any better with a modchip, it doesn't bypass anything. IANAL, though, so I might be wrong.

Re:EULA changes?

[Anonymous Coward]

Compaq didn't reverse engineer the bios, Phoenix did a clean room implementation of it first if I recall correctly.

Re:EULA changes?

[dattaway]

If I remember right, Mr. Gates himself related the story of reverse engineering MSDOS by dumpster diving for source code. There was also the incident of disk compression technology that was lifted from another company. To say that common people can not raise the hood of their own car to see how it works or put in a new engine might be called hypocritical.

Re:EULA changes?

[leviramsey]

you can't say that if you don't hold up your end of the agreement, that the other person gets to kill you

Of course, the assisted suicide debate offers an interesting view on this issue, as going to Dr. Kevorkian is essentially signing a contract where (as a condition of the contract) he kills you.

Re:EULA changes?

[grahamkg]

IANAL...

The EULA in essence is a contractual agreement. It is legal and supported in a court of law as long as it meets certain criteria: competent parties; subject matter; consideration; mutuality of agreement; mutuality of obligation.

You read a EULA from MS. My guess is you're a competent party, as is MS. The EULA sets forth rules, establishing what you both will or won't do. You give them money, they give you rights. You agree to it or not. You are both obliged to follow the terms of the EULA.

The EULA can potentially be invalidated if its obligations are against the law. Likewise, if consideration is unduly biased towards one party, that too could invalidat it.

Check out law a little bit. You might find it interesting.

Re:EULA changes?

[Squarewav]

the EULA is not the problem, Its the fact they have to disable the copy protection (illegal in the USA) in order for it to even load linux,mame or whatever.

I find it silly that people are risking large fines or maybe even jail time just so they can run linux on it, come on its a low end pc. I know what your thinking "MS losses money on every sale" that has to be the biggest urban legend wile its true when the thing was first released they lost a few dollars, but like all consoles once they pay for the initial production costs they break even on the sale, hell if you have 200$ to spend on a linux system walmart.com has lindows equipped thing that's far more useful then a xbox and it counts as an actual linux sale

Re:EULA changes?

[Anonymous Coward]

"There is a limit to how extreme contracts can get"

That limit is legality, AKA an unenforceable contract term. For example, You sign a contract with me to sew nikes together at $0.03 a shoe. You can do it, and I can pay you, but if I piss you off, you can go to the authorities and say 'This is illegal, and I want out.'

Re:EULA changes?

[Jeremiah Cornelius]

AMD didn't reverse engineer Intel's CPUs. They used to work together on processors

Well, I wouldn't say "work together"... :-P

AMD had some fantastic processes for -- at the time -- incredibly fine micron CMOS fabrication. Intel had dink to show in the fab department. In order to build a 386 faster than 16 MHz, that wouldn't require raised-floor equipment to keep cool, they needed a license on AMD's fabrication technology.

AMD exchanged this license, in exchange for a license on 286 and future technologies. The grounds for what these future technologies were comprised of were the grounds for the Intel/AMD legal battles of the '90's. The courts agreed this was inclusive of the i386 microcode, and the rest... is history

Re:EULA changes?

[mbogosian]

Sorry but reverse engineering is pretty well established....

Here, here! (Of course it's not legal anymore, but that's splitting hairs....)

Whatever happened to legitimate forms of deterrance? If I crack open my TiVo, I void the warranty. I can dick around all I want, but if I screw something up, I have to pay to have it fixed. This is enough to deter most of the technology-ignorant public from screwing with their hardware, and it's a method which has been around for years. Has everyone forgotten about this?

Re:EULA changes?

[ActiveSX]

walmart.com has lindows equipped thing that's far more useful then a xbox and it counts as an actual linux sale

Where's the fun in that? Hackers are more likely to get interested in weird hardware than some cheap, off the shelf Walmart machine. It's just more exciting that way.

Re:EULA changes?

[Galvatron]

I think the reason Shelled is trying to draw a distinction is that arguably, EULA's are not contracts. There is no meeting between the two parties, no chance for negotiation, no signature, the EULA is perpetual, and a price is paid for a physical good (making it look very much like a sale, covered by first sale doctrine rather than contract law). Of course, IANAL, but from the articles that get on Slashdot every now and again, it sounds like the courts haven't quite settled on an answer as to whether EULA's are legitimate contracts or not.

Re:EULA changes?

[DragonMagic]

Problems I find with your argument:

1) You assume a person reads an EULA. Even though a contract can still hold up if you don't read it, you're still required to sign it. If you never read an EULA or agree to it through a click, then how are you agreeing to it? Simply because they say "By using this product, you agree to our terms"?

2) Another problem with EULAs are many of the corporate ones are too one-sided. They're not responsible for anything, but you're fully responsible to follow all their rules. Some even say you can't even talk about the product or take pictures of it or anything without permission, but that they can use your information for their company's marketing research without your permission to do so. (that is, they can use it to market you magazines whether or not you asked for them)

3) You don't need to be 18 to buy many EULA products, and to have a contract valid, either a person 18 or older must agree to it, or the parent or guardian of that under-18 person must agree to have that person agree. When a 17 year old purchases an Xbox and takes it home, goes through the licensing agreements on his own, then starts playing, how can Microsoft say the EULA can still affect him?

4) There are many people who play video games who cannot read, or cannot read English. So EULAs written in English are still valid even though the other party cannot understand them? I do believe that contracts have to be signed by parties that understand them, and if it's in another language, the translator must sign off on them. I could be wrong, of course.

But again, EULAs are hardly contracts in the sense of contracts, but more of agreements that you won't do bad things to the company issuing the product. I can't wait until EULAs are struck down and normal copyright laws apply to the products (or patents to hardware).

Re:EULA changes?

[shepd]

>Instead you'll have a bare minimum sit down with a sales negoiator. You and he will talka bout the contract you will be shortly signing.

That's the idea. If it becomes a major PITA (and this is) to buy products that require a EULA, then people won't. They will prefer to buy products covered by basic copyright law (like GPLd products) and will be happy that they didn't waste their time buying products that take _forever_ to buy.

Re:EULA changes?

[mindstrm]

Well, what about region coding on the games.
It would be a much weaker argument in court, of course.

Re:EULA changes?

[Anonymous Coward]

If I remember right, Mr. Gates himself related the story of reverse engineering MSDOS by dumpster diving for source code

Cool! You mean that Microsoft had to reverse engineer their own product?

Re:EULA changes?

[vsprintf]

You read a EULA from MS. My guess is you're a competent party, as is MS. The EULA sets forth rules, establishing what you both will or won't do. You give them money, they give you rights. You agree to it or not. You are both obliged to follow the terms of the EULA.

Well, only one party is really bound since MS EULAs always give them the right to modify the terms whenever they feel like it.

Re:EULA changes?

[Anonymous Coward]

No, he gives you the means to kill yourself. You're the one doing the killing.

Re:EULA changes?

[belroth]

Not to mention how stores would love to spend 30 mins negotiating to sell a $300 dollar item... especially in the Christmas shopping insanity!

It may become a new form of anti-MS (for example) activism:
when you have a few hours going into into a shop and going through all the contract details until you decide that they are too onerous and decline to accept the terms offered.

Re:EULA changes?

[dreamword]

You raise good issues. However, things are not precisely as you state (or, perhaps, as they should be).

1) You assume a person reads an EULA. Even though a contract can still hold up if you don't read it, you're still required to sign it. If you never read an EULA or agree to it through a click, then how are you agreeing to it? Simply because they say "By using this product, you agree to our terms"?

It doesn't matter if the person reads the EULA, mostly because there's really no way to prove whether or not the person read the EULA. In this context, clicking "accept" is as good as a signature. If you're curious, see ProCD v. Zeidenberg, one of the first clickwrap cases. It's a very good opinion reasoning why clickwraps should be binding.

2) Another problem with EULAs are many of the corporate ones are too one-sided. They're not responsible for anything, but you're fully responsible to follow all their rules. Some even say you can't even talk about the product or take pictures of it or anything without permission, but that they can use your information for their company's marketing research without your permission to do so. (that is, they can use it to market you magazines whether or not you asked for them)

They are definitely "one-sided" in that one side has more responsibilities to the other side. However, it's not true that you're just signing away your rights for nothing; if you were, there would be no binding contract. You're signing away your rights to do certain things in exchange for them letting you use their software. The right to use their software does not cost just what you pay for the box at the store; it costs what you pay for the box at the store PLUS your agreement to follow the license terms.

3) You don't need to be 18 to buy many EULA products, and to have a contract valid, either a person 18 or older must agree to it, or the parent or guardian of that under-18 person must agree to have that person agree. When a 17 year old purchases an Xbox and takes it home, goes through the licensing agreements on his own, then starts playing, how can Microsoft say the EULA can still affect him?

Good one. I'm not sure. There are some kinds of contracts that minors can make, but I don't think this is one of them. If there's no contract, it's possible that the minor might not be held to the license terms, and we'll have to rely on under-18ers to do our dirty work. On the other hand, it's possible that the minor can't assert the right to USE the program at the same time as they assert the right NOT TO BE BOUND to the terms of the license agreement. Anybody have a better grasp on this area? I don't know if there have been any minor-clickwrap cases. Same goes for English-illiterate clickwrap cases; I just don't know if anyone's litigated it yet.

But again, EULAs are hardly contracts in the sense of contracts, but more of agreements that you won't do bad things to the company issuing the product. I can't wait until EULAs are struck down and normal copyright laws apply to the products (or patents to hardware).

They're definitely contracts, in any legal sense of the word. It sucks (I think first sale doctrine should apply, and there should be some consumer-software default rules set legislatively that are hard for software companies to EULA around), but that's how it is.

Re:EULA changes?

[Kwil]

It doesn't matter if the person reads the EULA, mostly because there's really no way to prove whether or not the person read the EULA. In this context, clicking "accept" is as good as a signature. If you're curious, see ProCD v. Zeidenberg, one of the first clickwrap cases. It's a very good opinion reasoning why clickwraps should be binding.

Okay. Now show me (and the judge) the proof that:
A. The agreement said what they say it said.
B. I clicked accept.

Remember that programs including installs can be buggy, and sometimes even the bugs seem temporary.

"Honest, your honour, there was this blank screen that popped up with two blank buttons on it. I didn't know what to do so I clicked one and everything seemed to work out okay. No, I don't know how it could have happened, I'm no programmer. I do remember having to swap out my memory chips shortly after though 'cause they seemed to be doing funny things at the time."

Re:EULA changes?

[michrech]

The disk compression technology was 'lifted', if I dismember correctly, from STAC Electronics...

That was one of the reasons behind the release of MSDOS 6.22.

Re:EULA changes?

[starling]

That was the BASIC, which was based on a listing of Dartmouth BASIC which they found in the trash. All MS did was port it to a different processor. They bought MSDOS from another company.

That's right, MS's original flagship products weren't written by MS. They started as they meant to continue.

Re:EULA changes?

[Anonymous Coward]

Dude, watch out for the fireclown. He doesn't like you very much.

PS - Wasn't there something about Intel's customers (like the DoD) wanting a second source supplier for the x86 line as well?

Re:EULA changes?

[dreamword]

OK! No problem. IANAL.

A. You still have that CD you installed from, right? Let's just pop it in and see what it does. My guess is it'll display a EULA saying what I say the EULA says, and an accept button that needs to be pressed before you can go on.

Oh, you don't have the CD you installed from? OK, here's a CD that was pressed from the same master as the one that was sold to you. Same goes.

B.
Me: "Did you use the program?"
You: "Yes."

Then I show that you need to click Accept in the software to use the program.

You: "But there was a bug. I never saw the agreement or any 'Accept' button."

Me: "But you used the program anyway, even though you knew it was under license? And you didn't make any efforts to find out what the license terms were?"

You: "Yeah."

You can see where this is going. You'll never be able to prove that the EULA you saw said something different than I say, since you and I both know it said the same thing.

Now, what happens if there was actually a bug and you actually never saw or accepted the EULA? I'd say it's a tossup. This is just a guess; there's no case law on point that I know of. If there was any material along with the software indicating that it was subject to license, you'd probably lose; it would probably then be your responsibility to find out what the license terms were, and not use the software until you were successful. If nothing ever said it was subject to license, you'll probably win, since you had nothing telling you it was subject to license.

If you say there was a bug, it'll be on you to prove that there was. If you can reproduce it, you're probably home free on that point.

Re:EULA changes?

[spectecjr]

The disk compression technology was 'lifted', if I dismember correctly, from STAC Electronics...

You don't remember correctly. It was a patent infringement case.

You know, like that JPEG patent recently? Except this one covered compressing on the fly to disk.

Think of it as an early equivalent of 1-click ordering. ie. something a completely newbie could invent in 5 minutes.

Simon

Re:EULA changes?

[sco08y]

Yup. It was originally call QDOS, for Quick and Dirty OS.

Re:EULA changes?

[Billly Gates]

True, but the original IBM's were not under EULA. Only pc-dos was.

Mistake on IBM's part. If they did this then the clones never would of existed.

Re:EULA changes?

[Anonymous Coward]

of course you never consider the fact that _you're_ technologically ignorant too? most
people are, even the people that think they're not. if you're running a PEECEE, you're guarenteed to be.

Re:EULA changes?

[g4dget]

That's the idea. If it becomes a major PITA (and this is) to buy products that require a EULA, then people won't. They will prefer to buy products covered by basic copyright law

That is, if the industry heavyweights don't collude to standardize on a set of restrictive terms, to the disadvantage of customers. That's what has happened in many other areas, e.g., banking, mortgages, etc. Furthermore, many EULAs are only available after purchasing and opening the products.

It would really make a lot of sense for the government to define standard terms of sale for computer software. If companies want different terms, they should be required to present a written contract prior to purchase and have it signed by both parties.

Re:EULA changes?

[vldmr_krn]

doesn't this in essence give Microsoft (and others) the power to create law?

No. It allows them to control how much of their rights to a product they give up in exchange for your dollars. This is just M$ exercising its property rights, and has nothing to do with creation of laws.

Re:EULA changes?

[perky]

why should buying a legal contract be any more difficult than buying a physical box? I went on holiday a few weeks ago and an hour before I left I realised that my travel insurance had expired. I purchased a travel insurance contract in about 15 minutes online with no difficulty. Essentially buying a piece of paper is no more of a "PITA" than buying anything else.

Re:EULA changes?

[zenyu]

You don't remember correctly. It was a patent infringement case.


Microsoft might have settled the case in part because patent infringment. But I ditinctly finding STAC's copyright string searching one of the Windows 3.1? binaries.

But the BASIC, STAC, and last year's French case have nothing to do with reverse engineering which is a standard practice taught in school. These are cases of plagarism which happen all the time in big companies but are not standard practice and are sometimes even litigated successfully.

And while I'm no Microsoft fan, even the best code reviews can miss copied code since you're not really looking for this kind of thing. If you see a foreign copyright string in the code and the programmer says it's licenced or he has told legal they need to licence the code you trust him; most programmers can be trusted, it's just the law of large numbers that lead to a 0.1% cheat rate to mean there are 50 in a team of 50,000.

Re:EULA changes?

[shepd]

>You think that the end of EULAs won't affect GPL software?
>Really?

Very much a wholehearted NO. GPL software will be a stronger market presence as an effect. It will effect it in a good way, very strongly.

>There are EULA's for the major Linux distros

One word: DEBIAN.

>Actually read one.

I run slackware. It's EULA seems fine to me. Of course, it really doesn't seem to have one past the GPL.

>This will help, since for the Select/Enterprise their is a contract, signed and sealed, before entering the program.

First, companies are only using MS trash because people at home use it and companies are notoriously lazy at training people, prefering the free training that people get at home on crapware instead of quality training on decent software.

Second, if this were the end of EULAs, people at home would be running GPL software, and MS would be run into the ground. You would choose the licensing method -- you could choose per computer, per user, or per machine that is on. Basically, a company manned 24/7 could probably purchase less than 1/4 of the licenses they use, legally.

>RedHat on the other hand may have trouble selling even a $40 copy of RH because of the required hassle of signing a contract

Then RedHat will go out of business. It's about time, too. Their distro sucks. Blech. Stick with proper GPL software, like Debian, or really loose contracts, like Slackware, and life is so much easier in this regard.

Re:EULA changes?

[shepd]

>That is, if the industry heavyweights don't collude to standardize on a set of restrictive terms, to the disadvantage of customers. That's what has happened in many other areas, e.g., banking, mortgages, etc.

All these still require an extensive amount of paperwork, discussion of the contract point by point with the customer, and a signature. It takes far longer to get a mortgage than it does to buy windows XP. I think I can safely say I could even install XP before you'd have the mortgage sorted out.

>Furthermore, many EULAs are only available after purchasing and opening the products.

Which, fortunately, invalidates the EULA unless it allows you to return the software. Infact, in many cases, most EULAs are rendered invalid in court by other causes as well...

>It would really make a lot of sense for the government to define standard terms of sale for computer software.

They did. It's called copyright, and it extends very well to software. You can run the software for yourself, and can't copy it for others. What more should a home user, or a small business need to worry about?

>If companies want different terms, they should be required to present a written contract prior to purchase and have it signed by both parties.

Totally agreed. Buying software with complicated EULAs that specifies things like how many backup copies you are allowed to make should take as long as signing a mortgage. But it ain't gonna happen as long as the governments of the world are mostly running the offending software... :-(

Re:EULA changes?

[shepd]

>I purchased a travel insurance contract in about 15 minutes online with no difficulty.

15 minutes is the keyword. It takes 10 minutes to drive down to the store. Now the Best Buy agent explains, point by point, the contract, and has you sign it. In the end, when you return home, 40 minutes have passed instead of 25.

Now, travel insurance is pretty much a necessity (if you don't have it you're going to look sick) and is part of the entire "preparing for a vacation" deal.

Many software purchases are convenience purchases. Those aren't going to happen if it takes too long.

Not to mention that unlike your online site, buying at a store will hold up the guys at Best Buy for 15 minutes. This will translate into a $10 or $20 price increase on all EULAized software, after administration. That will not be popular with Best Buy, and they won't carry software that makes them so uncompetitive to online sites. No EULAized software on their shelves means no exposure. No exposure brings the EULA software on par with non-EULA software. And bingo! GPL (et al.) software has a fighting chance.

North America has already shown everyone that a lack of convenience will always kill a product. Look at Divx for example.

Re:EULA changes?

[mbogosian]

of course you never consider the fact that _you're_ technologically ignorant too? most people are, even the people that think they're not. if you're running a PEECEE, you're guarenteed to be.

Eh, maybe you're right.... Not to split hairs (again), but strictly speaking, I don't think my TiVo even falls into the colloquial definition of a PEECEE (which typically denotes a (W)Intel-based microcomputer architecture of some sort). It uses a PowerPC 403GCX embedded controller (offering several distinct advantages over a 403GA or 403GC including increased cache size and support for EDO RAM, while maintaining a compatible initialization state with those models; it should be noted however that the 401 series PowerPC is more forgiving about misaligned data: the 401 core has hardware support for misaligned half-word and word-sized loads and stores, whereas misaligned accesses on the the 403 series causes an alignment interrupt; yes, relying on this behavior of the 401 did get me into portability trouble when I was a Comp. Sci. student; but hey, live and learn, right?). It also runs a multi-user-capable, time-sharing kernel (Linux).

But what would I know? I'm just a technologically ignorant PEECEE user.

Re:EULA changes?

[msaavedra]

You think that the end of EULAs won't affect GPL software?...There are EULA's for the major Linux distros (RH, Mandrake, etc). They are more complex than "just the GPL, please".

You are seriously overstating this. I looked up the Redhat 8.0 EULA and it is not more complex than the GPL. It is actually quite a bit simpler. It basically states that all of Redhat's brand names and logos are not GPL'ed, they are protected by trademark. This obviously has nothing to do with the GPL software which they distribute. They then have the standard disclaimer denying responsibility for damages, etc. This sort of language is in the GPL as well. Again, no big deal.

The only related problem I can see GPL'ed software having is if the aforementioned disclaimer is thrown out in court. Leaving programmers (many of them hobbyists) open to damages in lawsuits would be disastrous to our ability to freely trade code.

Re:EULA changes?

[clare-ents]

I don't see how this works for cases like this

I buy Software X
I do not agree to the EULA
- I have rights to reverse engineer and backup the
software on the CD
I modify the software to remove the EULA clickwrap.
I then install this modified software.

At what point did I either break the law or agree to the EULA ?

Re:EULA changes?

[Anonymous Coward]

and, um, they didn't buy QDOS either. The deal to buy it fell through when the seller wanted too much money, so they stole it.

Re:EULA changes?

[UltraMagic]

I'm no lawyer, but it seems that they can put anything in the EULA, and if you agree to it then you are bound to it. I have always seen this as an end run around the law, but it seems to be used more and more frequently.

Re:EULA changes?

[Jeremiah Cornelius]

PS - Wasn't there something about Intel's customers (like the DoD) wanting a second source supplier for the x86 line as well?

Yeah, you're right... This was one of Intel's motivations for the tech transfer with AMD. IIRC, it was the removal of second-source restrictions that encouraged Intel to try and back away from the agreements as AMD saw them.

Dude, watch out for the fireclown. He doesn't like you very much.

I beleive him to be as diminished as myself in this continuum... He sits out front of the Starbucks by the Pacific Stock Exchange, these days. Sad, really. I give him change.

Re:EULA changes?

[Anonymous Coward]

Bullshit.

Re:EULA changes?

[DeathToBill]

3) You don't need to be 18 to buy many EULA products, and to have a contract valid, either a person 18 or older must agree to it, or the parent or guardian of that under-18 person must agree to have that person agree. When a 17 year old purchases an Xbox and takes it home, goes through the licensing agreements on his own, then starts playing, how can Microsoft say the EULA can still affect him?

IANAL, but I have done a contract law subject. Under Australian Common Law, a minor will be bound by:

• Cash contracts (paid in physical tender),
• (li>Contracts for the purchase of things necessary to the minor's station in life,
• Contracts that are beneficial to the minor.

I think you would have a hard time arguing that most software was necessary to a minor, and it seems unlikely that a EULA would ever be considered beneficial...

Re:EULA changes?

[Anonymous Coward]

...listing of BASIC which they found in the trash and proceeded to develop with stolen timeshared computer time, time stolen from Harvard University.

Re:EULA changes?

[Anonymous Coward]

This would be true of RedHat if their main business was selling $40 copies of RedHat. No, RedHat's main business is actually consulting. They have a lot of big clients (a friend of mine is a RedHat consultant working at AOL, one of RH's clients) and they do much more money on that kind of stuff than they do selling Linux CDs and tech support contracts to consumers. Free software companies that are actually profitable don't make their money selling shit to consumers; they make it in customizing the software for major corporations who don't mind shelling out several million a shot.

If you secure it, they will come...

[LowAmmoWarning]

and crack it.

any chance?

[rizawbone]

could these xbox hackers come over and get my ms office from asking for my cd every time i do a 'find' in explorer?

that would REALLY impress me.

Re:any chance?

[Anonymous Coward]

Just do a custom install and choose the right package so it is on your hard drive.

Re:any chance?

[Anonymous Coward]

What in the hell are you using M$ products for in the first place? Closed-source is evil.

That wasn't a joke, either.

Re:any chance?

[scott1853]

Hey, I'm not the only one that had that problem.

Too bad I can't remember exactly what I did to fix it.

Some things I tried though were a re-install Office and uninstall the Windows Installer and re-installing the latest version of it.

I think one or both of those things fixed it. If I remember correctly though, the problem was caused by my deleting of the Office folder without uninstalling it.

Re:any chance?

[Tony-A]

"Install on Demand".
Sounds good, but turns out to be a major pain.
Do a Custom install, and set everything either to Not Available or to Run from My Computer or possibly from Network.
Now you get to play the guessing game of what you do and do not want installed.
This is what is known as "user friendly".

Re:any chance?

[ickyfreak]

moron

If they cant secure an Xbox.

[anonymous coword]

Then paddalium will be cracked too. I can see it.

Re:If they cant secure an Xbox.

[Anonymous Coward]

Microsoft isn't designing the hardware that supports Palladium, Intel is.

Re:If they cant secure an Xbox.

[GreyWolf3000]

Microsoft didn't design the X-Box either--if they need to change Intel to make it harder to circumvent Palladium, then they will work with Intel to do just that, since Intel's too big to boss around.

Re:If they cant secure an Xbox.

[oh2]

You mean Palladium I hope ?

Unless of course paddalium is a new devilish scheme by Microsoft and the forces of darkness!

Up Open Hardware! Or is it Open up Hardware ?

Re:If they cant secure an Xbox.

[FooBarWidget]

It doesn't matter wether Palladium gets cracked or not, because for the vast majority of users, there will be no difference. The security may be "good enough" so that it can only cracked by using illegal hardware.
If the majority ("average users") can't break the security, then any solution is useless.

Re:If they cant secure an Xbox.

[vinyl1]

Actually, the paddalium is what Bill Gates will shortly be applying to the bottoms of these naughty hackers.

Re:If they cant secure an Xbox.

[vsprintf]

Actually, the paddalium is what Bill Gates will shortly be applying to the bottoms of these naughty hackers.

No, paddalium is a new high speed lubricant that MS will be distributing with all EULAs.

Re:If they cant secure an Xbox.

[oh2]

BOHICA!

For all you non-naughty people :
Bend Over Here It Comes Again !

Re:All Right!!

[teamhasnoi]

You forgot, "GET SOME PRIORITIES!"

I thought that it was to prove a point that a linux webserver can run on anything.

This actually _is_ funny.

[TrueKonrads]

It brings me to this following tought: You can't protect anything that user has physical access to. Same situation is observable amongst CD 'copy (mis)protection' . Smart lads crack it in one week session. Maybe people should stop wasting money on copy proections and focus instead on actual product?

Re:This actually _is_ funny.

[ekrout]

Yeah, security's pointless.

Banks should just focus on hiring prettier, more friendly tellers rather than ensuring their online banking systems and ATM transactions are secure.

And while they're at it they should replace those cheap little lollipops with Tootsie-Pops or something...

Re:This actually _is_ funny.

[TrueKonrads]

Since the careful ekrout actually read my comment, he shurely must have missed word physical. P.S it's a 0 score comment

Re:This actually _is_ funny.

[Anonymous Coward]

My Friend, you've got a GOOD point!! So the obvious solution: Microsoft SHOULD NOT let you have physical access to your x-box!!

So when you put down the dough, you get an EMPTY box, and you plug your controller and TV into the INTERNET, and you use the xbox WHICH IS AT MICROSOFT HQ!!!!!! And of course you AGREE TO THE TERMS O' USE!!! Especially the part about SUCKING BALMER'S STEAMING SWEATY COCKMEAT!

THEN those FILTHY HIPPIES who think just because THEY PLUNKED DOWN their PATCHOULI-SOAKED money, that means somehow their xbox is THEIRS, they can GO TO HELL!

Re:This actually _is_ funny.

[Anonymous Coward]

Dear friend, your comment ALMOST MAKES SENSE.. but the CRUCIAL DIFFERENCE IS: THE BANK'S SYSTEMS are not IN MY HOUSE and INDEPENDENT OF THE BANK!!

Re:This actually _is_ funny.

[Anonymous Coward]

'Tis truly a sad, sad day...

My parent comment [by 'ekrout'] was an attempt at humor, but unfortunately I'm still half asleep and it isn't my usual 5 star-quality comment.

I promise to do better next time.

-- ekrout

Re:This actually _is_ funny.

[Bishop]

You can't protect anything that user has physical access to

I think that the designers of the IBM 4758 cryptographic coprocessors might disagree. The IBM4732 is supposed to be tampre proof.

Ofcourse if you were to say that you can't protect anything that users have access to at a reasonable price. Then you would be correct. You would also be correct to say that security is hard and must be integrated into the system from the first design stages and not hacked on later.

Re:This actually _is_ funny.

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't mind E r i c... his 300 lb. girlfriend Lindsay ran out on him and was last seen in a threesome with RMS and ESR.

Re:This actually _is_ funny.

[Anonymous Coward]

Hate when that happens... They should have a non penalizing modding down for lack of sleep posts. hackwrench
If you don't get angry at that which would kill you, it will succeed.

Re:This actually _is_ funny.

[lars_stefan_axelsson]

I think that the designers of the IBM 4758 [ibm.com] cryptographic coprocessors might disagree. The IBM4732 is supposed to be tampre proof [rutgers.edu].

And yet, an application on the IBM4732 was hacked a little under a year ago. Granted it wasn't the processor as such, but a very important application that is delivered with the processor. Getting the whole system right is hard.

If you want more material on why tamper proofing is difficult; Ross Anderson's team at Cambridge is a good resource. (And they have performed a number of nice hacks Markus Kuhn's optical eavesdropping for example).

Re:This actually _is_ funny.

[Henry V .009]

It is not tamper proof. The vulnerability is the enivronment sensors, which can be neutralized. The worst design flaw is that the IBM4732 doesn't have a block of thermite sitting on top that destroys the hardware in case of tampering. That wouldn't be fool-proof, but would mean that your lab would destroy a number of them in the initial 'figuring out how it works' stage. (Even better than thermite is a larger bomb that kills your scientists along with destroying the device. But scientists are replacable, so all you are really doing is raising costs.) Without the thermite, your lab only needs to procure one extra, take it apart, find all the tamper sensors and figure out a method to neutralize them. After that, you can take apart all the IC's with impunity. And really at this point your work is done. You duplicate the RAM contents, figure out the private keys (they have to be stored somewhere), and you have all the information. Very expensive process, but doable.

A very interesting historical parallel is the British bomb defusers, who worked on defusing failed German bombs. At first it was dangerous, but still relatively easy. Afterwards the Germans starting figuring out ways to booby-trap the bombs just in case they didn't go off right away. This was defeated. And finally they engineered bombs specifically to kill bomb defuse teams. Even this was defeated. A very interesting history that includes many of the greatest acts of bravery during the war.

Re:This actually _is_ funny.

[Anonymous Coward]

So what are you trying to say exactly? That if the companies actually made products worth buying and using, that they wouldn't have to resort to cheesy copy protection? No. Couldn't be! That's the dumbest thing I ever heard! :-)

On an offtopic side note... I am posting more frequently here. I should get a userid. Untill then,

Eric

Re:This actually _is_ funny.

[Anonymous Coward]

You can't protect anything that user has physical access to.

What you say is so true. Bruce Scheieir mentions something along these same lines in his book "Secrets and Lies: Digital Security in a networked world".

Copy protection schemes, be they electronic or otherwise, simply will fail given enough incentive to break them. People like hackers don't break schemes to be evil, they do it to prove it can be done. They get kudos from their peers from being clever and there is some reward involved, as in the Xbox: one gets a realtively powerful computer for a fairly cheap price.

Re:This actually _is_ funny.

[Bishop]

Very expensive process, but doable.

Cost is always part of the doability [sic]. When designing a secure system part of the equation is how hard it would be to crack the system. It is possible to brute force RSA, but that does not make RSA any less secure. The same concept applies here. If it would cost more to crack the system then it would to buy an insider, then the system is, for most purposes, secure.

Re:This actually _is_ funny.

[Mark J Tilford]

There was a British TV series called _Danger UXB_ (unexploded bomb) which shows quite a bit of the techniques & technologies used by the defusers.

Re:This actually _is_ funny.

[Henry V .009]

No, it doesn't mean that the system is secure. It just means it is secure as practicable. Quite a difference. But it's also kind of meaningless, as the cost of buying an insider is hard to estimate. Depends on what you'll willing to do. Torture is very cheap.

By the way, doable is a real word. Doability seems like a valid extension. Its meaning is obvious and it serves a useful purpose. Feasible and feasiblility are possible synonyms, but they don't have the connotations. 'That is feasible' means 'that is possible.' But 'that is doable' connotes 'I can do that' or some such attitude.

So I'd suggest leaving the [sic] out next time.

Re:This actually _is_ funny.

[Jeremy Erwin]

I'm curious as to how much product liability insurance premiums will increase if thermite is involved. And what of the individuals who would seek to incorporate these anti-tampering devices into pipe bombs?

Re:This actually _is_ funny.

[tarth]

Words cannot adequately describe my facial expression right now. I just got hit square in the face with stupidity.

Re:This actually _is_ funny.

[WWWWolf]

The worst design flaw is that the IBM4732 doesn't have a block of thermite sitting on top that destroys the hardware in case of tampering.

And this is supposed to be discussion about tampering of X-Box, which is a consumer device.

I can see the grim future when they try to put physical destruction mechanism on a consumer product. "This game console provides you years and years and years of amazing, rad fun, but please, do not even sneeze at it, or the bomb we put in it to make it tamper-proof will probably go off, rendering on average three blocks unlivable. And we don't mean memory blocks, we mean city blocks."

Here we're talking about tamper-proof hardware, but in a way, it turns into completely off-topic direction without actually going into completely off-topic direction. =)

Re:This actually _is_ funny.

[Muddle]

I should think that it would have been easy to design this box so that if the covers are removed by anyone other than an authorized repair technician it is rendered unusable.
I've a few ideas regarding how this could be done, however I'll keep them to myself, because no one is paying me to think.
Yeah, it's laughable that with all the resources Microsoft has that they didn't do this to begin with. The Cat's out of the bag and getting it back in usually involves some measure of pain.

Re:This actually _is_ funny.

[Anonymous Coward]

I hope that consumer PCs implement this for people who cheat at counterstrike.

Re:This actually _is_ funny.

[Bishop]

It just means it is secure as practicable.

This is all security has ever meant. Whether it be computers or bank vaults.

Wonder about NVIDIA

[Anonymous Coward]

After they were left holding all those "old" xbox chips. Same thing going to happen again?

Makes sense

[dcstimm]

Proves that there is nothing microsoft can do to secure the xbox. Oh well, thank god for xbox hackers!

Re:Makes sense

[Anonymous Coward]

Whatever. All it proves is that nothing anyone or any company can make is hack-proof.

You should be ashamed of yourselves.

[zulux]

The good, hard working, people at Microsoft(tm) have worked long and hard to give you a Video-Game systmem that plays the games you want.

Instead of happily purchasing the system and all twelve games, and three extra HandHurt(tm) controllers - you go and make the poor people at Microsoft(tm) cry.

I think it's time you helped a good American(tm) company like Microsoft, instead of promoting the Communist-Finnish Linux.

Please, don't take food out of a fellow American(tm) - buy your Xbox today!

(MS: Please credit MSDN account #2341 for this post)

Re:You should be ashamed of yourselves.

[forged]

HandHurt(tm) controllers

You mean, one of these ?????

Re:You should be ashamed of yourselves.

[Anonymous Coward]

OUCH! America(tm)... does freedom mean copyleft?

Re:You should be ashamed of yourselves.

[Anonymous Coward]

I think it's sad that you have these criminal-minded Linux enthusiasts, who see no wrong in hacking a piece of technology that is NOT theirs, but owned by Microsoft! Yes, you bought the XBox (if you didn't steal it), but that doesn't give you the right to go manipulating the technology to suit your own personal agenda. Worse, you peeps seem to have nothing better to do than try and bash Microsoft. How about coming up with a better way of contributing to the computing community?

Re:You should be ashamed of yourselves.

[vsprintf]

The good, hard working, people at Microsoft(tm) have worked long and hard to give you a Video-Game systmem that plays the games you want. . . .

(MS: Please credit MSDN account #2341 for this post)

Sorry, but that should have been "Microsoft(R)". All your credits are belong to us.

Have a nice day,

Microsoft

Re:You should be ashamed of yourselves.

[Anonymous Coward]

It should have showed him whacking it off.

Re:You should be ashamed of yourselves.

[JungleBoy]

No. I think he means these

Re:You should be ashamed of yourselves.

[smcn]

Please, don't take food out of a fellow American(tm)

I agree. It could get quite messy.

Re:You should be ashamed of yourselves.

[Vegan Pagan]

What about the Communist-Finnish Japanese? You don't want us buying their PlayStations and GameCubes either, right?

Re:You should be ashamed of yourselves.

[schmink182]

I definitely see no wrong in purchasing an item which uses whatever technology, playing with it, making it better, what have you. If I buy it, then it is mine. If I turn it into a stereo system for whatever reason, that's the same as using it as a paper weight. It's very fun, and if I teach someone else how to do it, then they can have fun too and I will have helped the community.

Re:You should be ashamed of yourselves.

[micromoog]

How about one of these?

Numbnut??

[CmdrTypo]

It's "numbnuts", numbnuts. (Unless you really only have got one ...)

Re:Numbnut??

[Corporate Drone]

It's "numbnuts", numbnuts. (Unless you really only have got one ...)

unless, of course, he's half of a two-person team of hackers...

Re:Numbnut??

[Anonymous Coward]

Maybe he just isn't twins.

What about waiting for Palladium ?

[Anonymous Coward]

What about waiting for the first Palladium machines, and hacking those ?

Hacking the X-Box is great, I'm sure. But how much greater to wait for the companies most keen to restrict all our rights to invest a whole lot of money in Palladium - just to see it cracked and made completely useless ? It might even make them completely give up on the whole idea for a long, long time to come.

Re:What about waiting for Palladium ?

[anonymous coword]

As I stated in an earlier post, palladium can and will be cracked. Cracking the new xbox is proof that microsofts security methods are inferoir. Itwill convince people not to trust microsofts padillum, and will help to discourage it.

Re:What about waiting for Palladium ?

[Powercntrl]

But how much greater to wait for the companies most keen to restrict all our rights to invest a whole lot of money in Palladium - just to see it cracked and made completely useless ?

Ugh. Yet another reason to hate Palladium. After it gets hacked, you just KNOW they'll release Palladium service packs. I can see it now "Sorry, you can't install The Sims - Drunken Frat Party without DirectX 14 and Palladium 3.1 or later."

Re:What about waiting for Palladium ?

[Anonymous Coward]

Good idea. They give up on secure computing for a long time to come? Get your head out of your open source ass.

Re:What about waiting for Palladium ?

[bo-eric]

Oh, but the challenge then will be so much greater! Let's help Microsoft fix the "easy" ones before they roll out their "grand scheme", and their defeit will be wonderful.

Preventitive Security

[jdkane]

Once the complete XBox product is in the customer's hands, all the security in the world is simply a set of preventitive measures.
Because the product is an autonomous unit, obviously anybody is free to hit it from any angle until the security is broken.

I'm sure Microsoft doesn't really expect that the XBox product will be totally secure. So it's probably not such a big deal whenever the product is cracked.

However Microsoft's sporatic changes to the XBox security may easily cause confusion to consumers who try to purchase mod chips (because different version exist), which in and of itself it a good tactic. Frustrated consumers are probably less likely to spend money on modifications after they find some mods don't work (because they are meant for a different version of the XBox).

Re:Preventitive Security

[Zico]

Cool, somebody at Slashdot who actually gets it. It's just like with the Office XP activation stuff. A million imbeciles at Slashdot scream like it's some great accomplishment when people figure out workarounds, even though Microsoft never claimed that people wouldn't be able to get around it. What it does do, and has been successfully, is raise the bar over either the ability or desire of the casual copier. Sure, some loser who lives their life on a hacker board will keep on top of that info -- the other 99% of users will rather go the legit route and never worry about whether Office XP SP1 will work, which Xbox version they have and the corresponding mod chip they need and attaching it and flashing the bios, etc.

Re:Preventitive Security

[ruiner13]

However Microsoft's sporatic changes to the XBox security may easily cause confusion to consumers who try to purchase mod chips (because different version exist), which in and of itself it a good tactic. Frustrated consumers are probably less likely to spend money on modifications after they find some mods don't work (because they are meant for a different version of the XBox).

I disagree. I tend to think that if anyone is going to be buying a mod chip to run Linux on their Xbox they'll most likely have the ability to figure our which chip they need. At the very least, I bet the mod chip people will have good instructions on how to figure out which chip you need, as they most likely want to avoid return issues. At least I would.

Re:Preventitive Security

[Phoenix]

"Frustrated consumers are probably less likely to spend money on modifications after they find some mods don't work (because they are meant for a different version of the XBox)."

Granted save that you are forgetting one point there. Different types of mod chip exist for the various versions on the Playstation and the PSOne. Different mod chips exist for the various releases of the PS2. There are even different mod chips in existance for PS2's in the same class (wired, USB with one wire to connect, USB no wire, IC card type).

So far all the choices stop are the type of person who wants a mod chip but is afraid to mod the unit. It doesn't really affect the hard core techies who love the challange of the modded and hacked toy.

Re:Preventitive Security

[batand]

The average user can get a techi friend or friend of a friend to install it. That is where most people get the cracked games from, anyway.

Another possibility is to go to an electronic store to get it done. One such store in by neighborhood has a sign in the window :"mod chips for PS1/PS2 installed". (It's a little, local non-chain, one person store)

Basically, It might be MS's strategy, but I don't think it will prevent 90% from modding their X-box. More like 30%.

These incompatibilities are part of the whole computer industry. People don't buy and install RAM for this reason :)

Re:Preventitive Security

[syylk]

> Frustrated consumers are probably less likely
> to spend money on modifications after they
> find some mods don't work (because they are
> meant for a different version of the XBox)

...And even less likely to bother buying a console that can't run "backup" games.

Need a proof? What about PSX/PS2?

Re:Preventitive Security

[MrHat]

And the rest of us will just go buy from a vendor that doesn't treat its customers like criminals.

Re:Preventitive Security

[Anonymous Coward]

What are you, a mong?
The casual copier doesnt have the capability to copy xbox dvds.

Actually , zico, sounds familiar - you seem to have a policy of shitting out illogical pro MS posts all over slashdot.

Re:Preventitive Security

[sqlrob]

I'm sure Microsoft doesn't really expect that the XBox product will be totally secure. So it's probably not such a big deal whenever the product is cracked.

If it's not such a big deal, why did MS/NVIDIA write off a bunch of chips for the old version, rather then just finishing off the run with them?

Re:Preventitive Security

[Zico]

All 10 of you? That's cute, you actually think you matter.

Re:Preventitive Security

[SA3Steve]

You are kidding yourself if you believe that most people using mod chips on the PSX (I can't speak for the PS2) were using it to run their own 'backup' games...maybe someone else's 'backup' games.

Additionally, I don't think Microsoft is making any claim that the hardware will not be hacked...it is just to raise the bar so that it doesn't become as common as it did with the PSX...

Re:Preventitive Security

[Tony-A]

Methinks the confusion is in the one degree of separation between the XBox and Microsoft's attempts at enterprise-class computing.
Microsoft's sporatic changes ... may easily cause confusion to consumers.
Frustrated consumers are probably less likely to spend money on ... because they are meant for a different version of ...
The only consumers not likely to be confused are the purchasers of the mod chips.

Re:Preventitive Security

[syylk]

"You are kidding yourself if you believe that most people using mod chips on the PSX (I can't speak for the PS2) were using it to run their own 'backup' games...maybe someone else's 'backup' games. "

Yes, my post was ironic. The qouted "backup" meant that: burned copies of the games, bought at street corners or swapped at schools for one handful of pennies.

"Additionally, I don't think Microsoft is making any claim that the hardware will not be hacked...it is just to raise the bar so that it doesn't become as common as it did with the PSX..."

Nor the platform as successful as PSX either. That's was my whole point: no pirated games allowed -> smaller market

Re:Preventitive Security

[_Knots]

Who cares? I just don't want my equipment acting against me, and the companies behind it considering me a criminal.

So while "all 10 of [us]" might not have an impact on the market (personally I think there are more than 10 people going to be pissed off about Palladium, and I know there *are* more than 10 people out there with modchips installed), we will at least have equipment that does what *we* want it to, fully under our control, and will forever ignore the MPAA, the RIAA, and the US government.

Have fun in your megacorporation-dominated libertarian-party's utopia.

--Knots;

Re:Preventitive Security

[MrHat]

I really don't care if I matter. Your opinion means nothing to me, nor does the opinion of your constituents, your family, or your whole fucking city, for that matter.

What does matter - to me - is that some faceless incorporated entity isn't able to change management or go bankrupt and take my data with them. This isn't about changing the way others operate, it's about insulating tmy operation from those inevitable changes.

HAND.

Re:Confucius say ...

[FooBarWidget]

...but can hear, smell and taste better than those who can see.

This new xbox not really done for 'security'

[falzbro]

It seems that everyone is considering this new xbox revision to be a security upgrade, which it really doesnt seem to be. A few things on the PCB have changed, such as the USB header now being integrated on the main mobo, and few other things.

It seems to me (and others) that MS did a slight revision to cut costs. While they were at it, they did a few (very minor) changes to the BIOS to deter hackers. It's kind of gotten out of hand how people are calling this the 'new version that MS created just to not be hackable'.

--falz

Re:This new xbox not really done for 'security'

[Troed]

Oh, so you mean the totally new chain of trust, hashing and public key crypto they put in between the MCPX and the BIOS wasn't a security upgrade?

Here's a thread you need to study.

Re:This new xbox not really done for 'security'

[Anonymous Coward]

He didn't say they didn't make any security changes, ya fuckin' moron. He said that wasn't the main reason behind the new Xbox design. And he's right. Learn how to read.

Re:This new xbox not really done for 'security'

[Troed]

He said the did changes to the BIOS (cheap). Yes - and they also made changes to the MCPX (expensive), made by nVidia, causing nVida to dump a lot of chips already made (this caused nVidias financial result to shrink a lot, and was taken up as an issue in their report). That's something you DON'T do "just like that".

You could equally well say that the whole point of the v1.1 Xbox was to get rid of the modchips, and that the integration of the USB daughtercard was an additional benefit.

Re:This new xbox not really done for 'security'

[Anonymous Coward]

This is a personal note to the author about his sig. I waited till this went off the main page because I didn't want to interfere with the main discussion.

There are two issues here.

The first is that I feel your sig to be inappropriate to the environment here. This is a site for discussing tech and other "nerd for news" and your sig is completely unrelated. I am an Israel Jew, and found that the sig prevented me from concentrating on the discussion at hand due to the sig's highly charged and completely unrelated subject. I'm not trying to tell you not to speak your opinion on the Israel Arab conflict, just find a more appropriate forum.

Secondly, I checked out the site which you link to and just want to point out to you that the site has many basic factual errors. I only made a quick review of a few pages from the site, but it is clearly extremely one sided and built for the purpose of propaganda. I caution you to independantly verify things that you read on that web site.

If you wish to contact me to furter discuss this, my e-mail is sailorbob74133.nospam@yahoo.com

Wouldn't celebrate just yet...

[Powercntrl]

Remember the I-Opener?

Yea, that little Internet Appliance created by venture capital-funded Netpliance, whom had NOWHERE near the amount of money Microsoft does.

They according to this post on the I-Appliance BBS created SEVEN versions (including the original) of the I-Opener before heading to the land of failed dotcoms.

It's a good thing they called this X-Box 1.1v, cause I'm sure there'll be a LOT more point revisions in the future - Microsoft has the fundage to do it.

Re:Wouldn't celebrate just yet...

[waltc]

Compared to what it costs to create a given security, breaking it costs very little.

The best way to cut down on software piracy, the very best way bar none, is to cut down on the incentive for it. When software makers decide to get really competitive on pricing issues you'll see a big chunk taken out of the piracy market as a result. Especially commercial bootleggers who might see a bright future in investing in the hardware to mass-produce illegitimate copies of software they can retail at $69.95-$499 and higher. Dropping the price in that category drastically would take much of the wind out of the sails of a commercial pirate who has to spend the bucks to setup a successful CD-bootlegging operation. At $19.95 it gets even better, and the pirate has even less incentive.

That's why it's always been difficult for me to believe software piracy is anywhere near as bad as these companies make it out. If it was they'd be lowering prices to drive the bootleggers out of business. Instead of protection against pirates it seems more a case of these companies wanting to build greed-protection mechanisms instead.

Frankly, why should MS care if some hobbyist decides to mod his xBox to run Linux? Linux won't run any of the xBox software MS would receive a royalty for anyway, and in that case selling an xBox to a Linux hobbyist is one more xBox sale MS would not have made otherwise. (Granted I am not such a person so it's possible I've missed something material here.)

Re:Wouldn't celebrate just yet...

[xjerky]

"That's why it's always been difficult for me to believe software piracy is anywhere near as bad as these companies make it out. If it was they'd be lowering prices to drive the bootleggers out of business. Instead of protection against pirates it seems more a case of these companies wanting to build greed-protection mechanisms instead."

To add to your point, I also find fault with the logic that piracy is the reason why games cost as much as they do. The Sega Dreamcast enjoyed 9 months of being warez-free, yet during that time games were still $40-$50. Once the Dreamcast warez scene hit, prices did not suddenly go up as a result.

A better example would be the Nintendo Gamecube. So far, there is no piracy, and may never be due to their buring of game DVDs backwards, but are the games $20-$25 as a result? Nope, they cost just as much as everyone else.

Re:Wouldn't celebrate just yet...

[blitziod]

they are NOT worried about piracy..they are protecting the model. They do NOT want unlicensed game production, not piracy of games made. What if I start turning out an X box game that does not need their code and can play on an X box without paying them a cent?

Re:Wouldn't celebrate just yet...

[Anonymous Coward]

What if I start turning out an X box game that does not need their code and can play on an X box without paying them a cent?

uh... good for you and welcome to fucking America. No really what's your point? Do you honestly believe that it is illegal to do that? And what, how would MS feel? Oh pooh pooh... sniff sniff. Life's a bitch, get used to it.

It just goes to prove...

[fishlet]

It doesn't matter if you hire the smartest people you can find... theres always someone out there smarter. Microsoft may have put it's best people behind it's security initiative, but there are always going to be people out there that are more intelligent- not to mention more motivated. Or to make this a bit simpler... I think there are more people who want to hack the Xbox then there who don't want it hacked- it's pretty obvious who's gonna win. All MS will do is going to do is make it more challenging and guess what... theres plenty of people who like challenges. The more challenging it is, the more it's "just gotta" be hacked.

Re:It just goes to prove...

[Anonymous Coward]

I think you forget that it is easier to crack something than it is to secure it.

Re:It just goes to prove...

[epine]

This is a hierarchy of smarterness. It's a battle of Smaug against riddling hobbits and the arrow of destiny. Be careful where you stand when DRM falls, it will make a big ugly splash.

Eventually the dragons *will* win if they learn hard lessons from every mistake. The only question is whether the dragon, once perfectly armoured, will still be able to fly, or whether it will be so encrusted with layer upon layer of protective armour it can't really hurt anyone who doesn't stumble into its path. Copy protection died in the late eighties when people discovered it was more onerous than advantageous. When copy protection actually works, it drives your legitimate customers crazy. That's my hope for DRM, that it becomes so good no one can stand it.

Re:It just goes to prove...

[epine]

I'm typing on one of those stiff IBM keyboards today. Whenever I switch to a stiff keyboard, entire word fragments go missing. I think it's a trick my hands play when running up hill. I'd send them down to the minors, but they're on a one-way contract with a no-trade clause.

"is" from the first sentence should have been "isn't"

I'm convinced my hands are living evidence for Chomsky's theory of traces. The word fragments that go missing are the ones which don't resolve until word order is set. It's disturbing that my typing errors come out as correctly spelled words I didn't intend to use. It's like waking up one day and discovering your own mental processes work much like the MS Office grammar checker which allows you to make a complete ass out of yourself if your word forms are plausible.

Re:It just goes to prove...

[tang]

"It doesn't matter if you hire the smartest people you can find... theres always someone out there smarter."

But, really...doesn't there have to be someone who is the smartest at that moment? If there is always someone smarter, there would have to be an infinite amount of people!

Re:It just goes to prove...

[Anonymous Coward]

I think the infinite piece of the argument is time.

So tomorrow there will be someone better. People get better every day (hour, minute, or second, whatever) and as long as people are being born there will always be someone better.

Re:It just goes to prove...

[fishlet]

Hmnnn, I hadn't thought of that. I guess that proves you are smarter than me. But then again, there must be someone smarter than you... and him... and him.

Microsoft should give up

[Anonymous Coward]

Microsoft would avoid the embarrassment by including a Linux CD with each Xbox.

Re:Microsoft should give up

[mbogosian]

Microsoft would avoid the embarrassment by including a Linux CD with each Xbox.

Yeah, but they'd call it "MS Unix" or "MS OpenSource" something. I had no idea Microsoft invented HTML until I saw the file type for .htm docs in Windows....

Re:Microsoft should give up

[Salsaman]

I think they just invented the extension ".htm".

Because their OS couldn't handle ".html".

It doesnt matter

[Mindcry]

kinda funny how this security thing is a one way arms race... they make better and better security checks, meanwhile crackers (instead of trying to keep up and trick the checks) can simply hex edit the security right out ;)

This may be a bit more invovled, but it proves DRM will never really work, because computers were never originally designed to support restriction management, and retrofitting is too hard to implement since so many people already have really fast (unrestricted) computers/parts/technical knowledge.

Either way, if you can play music, and you have a line out, you can make copies... this is the same kinda thing.

Betcha Nvidia's Pissed

[Jason Earl]

Didn't Nvidia have to write off a bunch of hardware that became obsolete when Microsoft changed the XBox?

Re:Betcha Nvidia's Pissed

[Troed]

I have no idea why parent is moderated funny, it's entirely true and nVidia were NOT happy. It had quite a substantial financial impact also.

Re:Betcha Nvidia's Pissed

[Jason Earl]

I suppose it is somewhat comical that anyone would consider partnering with Microsoft in this day and age. Even the devil has a better reputation of living up to his end of the bargain.

Re:Betcha Nvidia's Pissed

[neocon]

I support the Palestinians. So would you if you cared to open your eyes [electronicintifada.net]

Now, what is it about linking to a site which describes Louis Farrakhan as `wise' and `balanced', which endorses murder-suicide bombings, and which rushed to repeat Arafat's lies that there was a massacre at Jenin, but claims they never said so now that Arafat admits that there was not which you think will make people agree with you?

Good precedence

[_marshall]

This sets a good precedence for DRM and MS's new security model..

OTOH, is this a big surprise? <cackles evilly> =)

good news indeed for the community

[mrpuffypants]

it's good to see this happening so quickly

however, since i bought my xbox the first day they came out (pre-ordered) i'm now just looking for a place to buy a modchip since lik-sang shut down to run linux on it

and i await the day i can have netBSD on there, for that will be dubbed 'dedicated server day' worldwide :)

Re:All Right!!

[dwc16]

"WHY would you want to run Linux on your X-Box? That is beyond me. You can get a fast PC for under $300. And a monitor - TVs have totally shitty resolution"

Answer (for some)
Find me a PC that can do progressive scan and/or component-out for under 300$. Now, hooked up to a nice plasma/front projector, etc etc, I can

- Run emulator's, yum!
- Watch any type of media that I please, full screen

That's just for starters. There is always a legit counter point. For me, I could pick up the new AIW 9700 with component-out, but I've already spent 300$ right there.

This is what excites joe-blows like me, no more having to drag the PC into the den and run a shitty s-video/whatever output to my HDTV.

I hope I've helped people to see one appeal for going through the long process of getting the xbox ready to run Linux, then running 100's of things thru that, including W2K.

Re:DONT SUPPORT REDHAT!

[Anonymous Coward]

Geeez ... Just make your own version of Red Hat 8 and put the Tiawan screen back in.

No one stands a chance against the age old "One China Policy" and every Asian country will be assimilated, just like Tibet.

My big gripe is that Red Hat 8 doesn't support states rights. When I click on a city in Michigan like Detroit, I want to see the Michigan flag not the USA flag.

The Xbox is Microsoft's test of Palladium

[jjh37997]

Don't you get it? The Xbox is Microsoft's test case for Palladium. They try their best to secure the Xbox and wait for the hackers to bust it. They keep on doing this until they find a way to lock it down to the point were nobody can hack it. Then they role out Palladium with all the safe-guards in place and hacker tested. You XBox hackers are just a tool of Microsoft!

Re:The Xbox is Microsoft's test of Palladium

[Anonymous Coward]

Ah - Microsoft's agents are modding the parent funny.

Re:The Xbox is Microsoft's test of Palladium

[cschieke]

While there is actually some logic to that position, there is some history that shows this is a bad approach for MS to take. Way back when, in 1997 Ian Goldberg presented a talk on (amoung other things) how in Europe incremental changes to the security of GSM networks lead to a whole "generation" of well trained hackers. I don't think MS is really looking to do that for the community.

Re:The Xbox is Microsoft's test of Palladium

[The Analog Kid]

Seriously now, I don't think they will be able to secure anything when they have people like Steve Ballmer, whose best attempt at stoping Linux is to dance around the stage and scream in a high pitched voice.

Re:The Xbox is Microsoft's test of Palladium

[Above]

So no Palladium until MS has a secure XBox.

Sounds like no Palladium to me

Re:The Xbox is Microsoft's test of Palladium

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm not sure I see the intelligent logic here. If this is what Microsoft is doing, its a terribly expensive mechanism for determining how to secure a platform. I can only imagine the cost of a new roll out, if this is true it's almost laughable that their even trying. Either get it right the first time, or don't bother because someone's going to eventually circumvent whatever half assed implimentation you put together.

Microsoft tends to take the spiral approach to development, this isn't especially useful if the what you're developing is suppose to be "good" security.

Re:The Xbox is Microsoft's test of Palladium

[Anonymous Coward]

I am sick and tired of hearing people tie Palladium to the XBox. PALLADIUM WILL RUN WITH A SPECIALIZED PROCESSOR FROM INTEL, which the XBox doesn't have.

The XBox is an experiment in seeing how secure you can get WITHOUT Palladium.

Re:The Xbox is Microsoft's test of Palladium

[Spokehedz]

Quote:

They keep on doing this until they find a way to lock it down to the point were nobody can hack it.

Err... Has Slashdot taught you anything?

No matter how complex the 'security' is of a device... no matter how custom the hardware is... no matter how proprietary the format is...

It still has to run code.

And anything is possible with the proper code. Anything.

I'm sure I'm not the only one to think this, but I've been saying for years:

"As long as it can do somthing, then there is a way to make it do something else."

If something can run code, then there is a way to make it run other code. Plain and simple.

Nothing will be 100% secure. Nothing. Absolutely nothing.

To think anything else is just plain stupid.

Even their 'online' network won't be 100% secure. Never. someone will figure out a way to get around it. I guarantee it.

Re:The Xbox is Microsoft's test of Palladium

[Anonymous Coward]

microsft using xbox as drm test?
trying to get it secure ?
oh comeon we all know microsoft couldnt secure a padlock let alone any code they put out.

Re:The Xbox is Microsoft's test of Palladium

[darqchild]

Just because not all the components support MS' DRM technology, doen't mean that it's not MS' DRM technology at work

Re:The Xbox is Microsoft's test of Palladium

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, just like the shitload of well trained spammers that we have today due to our petty ante fight against it.

New anti spam software, deletes anything that says "fresh young pussy".

Next week, deletes anything that says "teen pussy".

Next week, fuckit, deletes everything that says pussy.

Next week, also deletes anything that says "pu55y".

Next week, deletes anything that says "f r e s h y o u n g p u s s y"

fucking endless.

Re:The Xbox is Microsoft's test of Palladium

[DeathToBill]

When was DOS written? And we're still waiting for a secure version...

Palladium

[azaroth42]

Tell me again why we're worried about Palladium and DRM 'secure' code from Microsoft? ;)

--Azaroth

Re:Palladium

[Anonymous Coward]

because when you crack that, they will likely have a case to bring based on DMCA. this is not the same.

Re:Palladium

[vsprintf]

Tell me again why we're worried about Palladium and DRM 'secure' code from Microsoft? ;)

Because it will be as effed up as everything else they do.

Because I'm getting on, and one of these days when I'm hooked up to the monitors and breathing machine, I don't want someone at Microsoft reading slashdot archives to revoke my certificate.

Re:Palladium

[Cid Highwind]

Tell me again why we're worried about Palladium and DRM 'secure' code from Microsoft? ;)

Why don't you ask Lik Sang...

It's not the technology, it's the armies of lawyers that back it up.

Shaddup, Penfold.

[Anonymous Coward]

Danger Mouse

Some Background

[warmcat]

Disclaimer: I am numbnut.

The 1.1 version of the Xbox is certainly designed to be Palladium Lite. The concept is that no code is executed unless it matches a one way hash signature. The only exception is the boot ROM (512 bytes) which lives in the nVidia-designed MCPX chip; this is used to validate the next code to execute, which validates the next code to execute and so on.

Unfortunately for MS (and perhaps nVidia), they chose a hashing algorithm which already had a known flaw. The hash, which works on QWORDS (64-bit quantities) is completely insensitive to b31 and b63 of a QWORD both being inverted.

Doubly unfortunately for MS, the VERY FIRST DWORD of the hashed region is the entry point, and contains a long relative jump. The effect of flipping b31 and b63 on this QWORD is to retarget the jump to RAM.

Triply unfortunately for MS, they have a small interpreter built into their ROM code, whose instruction set is capabel to to IO amd memory r/w before the bootrom is validated and executed. It was trivial to add some memory writes to the interpreted code stream to prep the memory targetted by the modified jump with a jump back into the flash.

The end result is perversion of the hashed region in a way invisible to the hashing algorithm, and execution flow jumping to arbitrary code in the flash.

I urge anyone interested in both the technical detail and the larger issues raised by this to read the threads on http://www.xboxhacker.net as this is a much larger issue than simply another Xbox crack.

Re:Some Background

[mrpuffypants]

......zoom!

runs hand above head in the air.....

Re:Some Background

[Anonymous Coward]

you're retarded, go read noggin.com or something you pathetic retarded fuckhead. you dont belong here

Re:Some Background

[Ektanoor]

These reminds me of one program supposedly protected by a well known hardware key. The thing was roughly this:

IF (there is key on parallel port) AND (The key is working) {FORGET THE ... KEY AND RUN PROGRAM}

A few NOPS and some correction on jump point and the program was running without the key. For an Assembler old timer, it took nearly 15 seconds to Veni Vidi Vici (Julius Cesar phrase - I came, I saw and I won).

Considering that these hacks are slightly similar and that the hack I described is more than ten years old, then one can take an estimation on the level of security in XBox...

Re:Some Background

[Ektanoor]

Go learn some latin:

Vici means win in latin. Vici is the root for most latin words meaning win, and I know a few of them. Slavic languages translate it to pobedil, also english win. Besides, Cesar said this after his blitzkrieg against the king of Bosphorous and surprised the Senate for his early return.

Re:Some Background

[epine]

Hey Levi, what's Latin for "I came, I saw, I pissed on my own face". Show some respect for the complexity of language.

Re:Some Background

[ari_j]

Don't correct people if you don't know what you're talking about.

venio, venire, veni, ventum - to come
video, videre, vidi, visus - to see
vinco, vicere, vici, victus - to win (intransitive sense; the transitive gives us the powerful connotation of the word: 'to conquer'; arguably, Caesar was using the transitive form anyhow, but that's beside the point: this is a stronger verb than 'to win' is in English)

These are the 4 principal parts of each verb, as you'd find listed in a Latin dictionary. The third principal part, in each case, is the first person singular perfect indicative active - meaning, in short, that it indicates an action that the speaker undertook by himself at some time in the past. So, "veni, vidi, vici" translates directly to exactly what most people think it does: "I came; I saw; I conquered." However, most people pronounce it wrong. As Caesar would have said it, it is pronounced "we'-nee we'-dee we'-chee".

Also, you spelled Cesar wrong. That spelling refers to the inventor of Cesar salad dressing, in the early 1900's if I remember correctly, but don't quote me on that date since I can't even remember his first name. Caesar is the correct Latin spelling of Gaius Julius Caesar's family name, or 'cognomen' in Latin. And only the Germans got the pronunciation right, with Kaiser.

However, your history is correct enough to pass muster. But I have no idea where you're disagreeing with the parent post on this - and especially what rhetorical device you're trying to employ by saying "Besides, ...". Go learn English. Then Latin. And then you can teach people a Latin lesson in English.

Re:Some Background

[dozer]

That reminds me of long ago, when I was a high school junior working at ComputerWare Palo Alto. A customer came in wanting to demo Vette, a game by Spectrum Holobyte. Vette was copy protected: you needed to insert original disk before it would start up. Problem is, someone had stolen our demo.

So I said, hang on a moment. With the customer watching over my shoulder, I dropped into TMON and started banging around. 5 minutes later I had managed locate the copy protection was and hopped the PC right over it (TMON ruled). Vette fired right up.

The customer liked it a lot and bought a few copies of the game. That was one of my proudest engineering moments of my life.

Wonder what the DMCA would have said about that. :)

Re:Some Background

[Neillparatzo]

One might argue that the best test of any new protection technology is to put it in a game console, where if there is even the slightest weakness, it will get cracked in short order.

Maybe this was their intent.

Re:Some Background

[alehmann]

Damn, if only every demo at ComputerWare Palo Alto was as impressive as that. I used to notice the employees there were VERY fast at hitting control-cmd-power in event of a crash. It's almost as if they were trained to minimize their response time to the appearance of a bomb box.

Re:Some Background

[messiertom]

Ehm, is it me or did the parent just tell himself to go learn some Latin?

Re:Some Background (Score:5, Interesting)
by Ektanoor on 12-10-02 14:16 (#4437822) Alter Relationship

Re:Some Background (Score:1, Offtopic)
by Ektanoor on 12-10-02 14:39 (#4437904) Alter Relationship

Maybe he meant to insult himself as an AC - I do this sometimes to make things interesting... :)

Re:Some Background

[Anonymous Coward]

Caesar was using the transitive form anyhow, but that's beside the point

It seems we've forgotten the difference between a transitive and an intransitive verb. Transitive verbs take direct objects (more narrowly defined as accusative direct objects, since "intransitive" compound verbs in Latin can take funky dative objects).

"Veni, vidi, vici" contains no accusative direct object, nor is there additional text outside the well-known quotation that might contain an object. The three words were never spoken by Julius Caesar but instead appeared on the side of a wagon used in his Pontic triumph: a short, sweet slogan like a bumper sticker (see Suetonius, I.37). No room for an object; veni is clearly intransitive, and the intransitive vici is attested elsewhere. The only question is vidi, but I don't have an OLD handy to check on its transitivity.

The construction is asyndetonic and parallel, however, which leads one to suspect the verb-object relations are also parallel. Veni cannot take a direct object ("I came the Pontic asshats" doesn't work), so it would be more sensible to render all three as intransitive verbs.

Finally, and perhaps most importantly, to render "vici" transitively by "conquer" in English leaves you with a clearly transitive English verb without a direct object. If you're anal enough to have read this far or to have posted earlier in this thread, you're probably bothered by such a translation. If you're not, you're probably a thirteen-year-old trying to impress the world by your ability to use Google and pay attention in Latin class. It's okay, at least you'll pass; you'll learn to chill out when you get drunk and laid one day.

Of course, this has to be one of the most pedantic, useless discussions ever generated, out of a truly lame troll. Whether a verb is transitive or intransitive, "win" or "conquer," at least you have a clue as to what's going on in the text and hopefully aren't so blinded by your attempts to nitpick grammar that you miss the point of the slogan.

Re:Some Background

[Anonymous Coward]

Energy Star Issues.
If all computers use 5% more electricity doing 'checking', then this is bad. Is the cost 5% , ten percent or what?
Increased path length = wasted electricity = design fault

Re:Some Background

[zerocool^]

Sounds like autocad R14 or whatever the one right before autocad2000 was.

Mine came with a little red hardware key.

'Course it came in a pack of software I had to buy, including mathematica, matlab, msoffice, and some others, for $500, so that was well below retail price.

~Will

Re:Some Background

[ari_j]

Come is as intransitive as they come, so the best translation is probably "I came, I saw [OBJECT], and I conquered [OBJECT]." That's perfectly clear, concise, and valid English. The only thing that amazes me is that you wrote so many words to say so little: and that it was mostly wrong, but entirely obfuscated.

Re:Some Background

[Ektanoor]

Yeah, some cool explanation but you fail on some things:

Don't teach me latin. I know much better than you because the word Cesar said is the same used by my people today.

Cesar is a deviation of the name Caeser. Cesar, Cesaro, Cesario and so on... Yes, it is a deviation, but it is a deviation commonly accepted by the german-latins for a few centuries...

Learn English? Was I teaching English to anyone??? I know that my English is far from the average Englishman. But don't teach latin to someone who latin is nearly his natural born language. Specially, in a verb that for centuries remains unchanged. Upon Cesar's times, only the accent of "vici" changed a little.

And it's not "we'-nee we'-dee we'-chee" - your spelling is worse than a Barbarian...

Re:Some Background

[Ektanoor]

And besides you got me so mad that I'll state this in a more familiar language for me:

Julio Cesar disse:
Vim, vi e venci

Se tu nao sabes nada de latim e melhor nao dizeres nada.

Re:Dangerous?

[SmlFreshwaterBuffalo]

I don't know if this was meant to be humorous or not, probably 'cause I just woke up.

But well, the idea is to unplug the thing before you start soldering. Besides that, usually for a gaming system, there shouldn't really be any lethal voltages inside the system.

Please can someone explain to me ...

[Tim Ward]

... why anyone should want to run Linux on an Xbox? What will you be able to do with it that you can't do with Linux running on a proper computer?

Re:Please can someone explain to me ...

[JohnG]

Well, for one a GeForce 4 costs almost as much as an entire XBox. I have Linux on Playstation 2 just because I like the idea of developing for a console. I guess it's one of those things where if you have to ask you'll never get it.

Re:Please can someone explain to me ...

[mla_anderson]

In the very near future Linux will make a wonderful HTPC OS. At that point an Xbox minus Win2K will make a nice HTPC.

Re:Please can someone explain to me ...

[Squarewav]

Two questions:

1:Can the Linux XBOX even use the Nvidia??

2:With the PS2 Linux can you compile stand alone PS2 games and apps that don't require loading linux first??

Re:Please can someone explain to me ...

[JohnG]

I don't know about using the nvidia on linux xbox, but you can't compile standalone ps2 games on ps2-linux. I haven't compiled anything yet as I haven't got a sync on green monitor and the view on a TV screen is pretty lousy.

Re:Please can someone explain to me ...

[Mac Degger]

Because it's there.

Re:Please can someone explain to me ...

[Anonymous Coward]

If you cannot boot xbox into linux, sure it won't do nvidia on linux.
if you can boot xbox into linux, how much more difficult it could be to use the nvidia on linux?

Re:Please can someone explain to me ...

[RedX]

... why anyone should want to run Linux on an Xbox?

The answer to your question is just a few posts above:

Please show me the $199 PC that has a DVD drive, onboard NIC, decent video and sound that I can run into my TV and, while on, is pretty much noiseless that also plays Xbox games. Provide links, if possible, and I'll go buy one instead of the Xbox I was planning on buying (refurb on sale for $159.99 at Electronics Boutique!) today. If you could, please hurry as the sale ends this weekend.

I'm not being entirely sarcastic (if there really is a place that sells comparable $200 PCs, I would buy one), but I am tired of this whole "you can get PCs for the price of an Xbox" argument. My motherboard cost almost that much by itself. My video card cost more than that. Just because I can get a crappy Microtel or whatever at Wal-Mart for $200 bucks doesn't mean it's just as good

Re:Please can someone explain to me ...

[Alsee]

What will you be able to do with it that you can't do with Linux running on a proper computer?

For starters you can put some cash back in your pocket. A PC (proper computer) with the same components costs more.

If you bought an XBOX to play the games then it saves you the cost of buying a seperate box to run Linux.

It also enables you to post a story to slashdot :)

-

Re:All Right!!

[Anonymous Coward]

point proven, move on.

Re:Dangerous?

[Cyno01]

lethal voltages in the system will be microsofts next security measure

Question for you.

[FreeLinux]

This post is not meant as a flame or insult, I'm genuinely curious.

There are a few possible reasons for this hack:
It's cool.
Because it's there.
Because you want to piss off M$.
You didn't have anything better to do.

But, using the XBox as a cheap Linux PC isn't one of them as PCs can be found for $199. So, my question is; what is your motivation to spend so much time hacking the XBox?

Re:Question for you.

[Troed]

Please come to Sweden and show me where I can get a cheap PC with the characteristics of the Xbox in a store, for the same price.

Oh, you thought the US was the whole world?

Re:Question for you.

[KFury]

Because a $199 Linux PC doesn't have a kickass video card, DVD drive, or NTSC out.

Re:Question for you.

[handsomepete]

Please show me the $199 PC that has a DVD drive, onboard NIC, decent video and sound that I can run into my TV and, while on, is pretty much noiseless that also plays Xbox games. Provide links, if possible, and I'll go buy one instead of the Xbox I was planning on buying (refurb on sale for $159.99 at Electronics Boutique!) today. If you could, please hurry as the sale ends this weekend.

I'm not being entirely sarcastic (if there really is a place that sells comparable $200 PCs, I would buy one), but I am tired of this whole "you can get PCs for the price of an Xbox" argument. My motherboard cost almost that much by itself. My video card cost more than that. Just because I can get a crappy Microtel or whatever at Wal-Mart for $200 bucks doesn't mean it's just as good.

Anyways, all of this hacking stuff is over my head, but I would assume that the challenge is kind of interesting and being part of the group that is a watchdog to the predecessor to Palladium must be at least part of the intrigue. But what do I know. *shrug*

Re:Question for you.

[warmcat]

I have a complex, personal set of reasons to do this stuff.

Your question is broken though, because here in the UK where I live, comparable PCs simply do not exist at the equivalent price. Even an entry level PC is $100 more.

I am very concerned about the recent advances in law of the rights of copyright holders, and the related issue of software patents. There is a general, historical shift that is happening too slowly for us to notice of rights being leeched away from consumers. For example, the top question on this news item is about the EULA for the device. This is a crazy concept for almost all other things that people buy. When you buy something, you should own that implementation of it. You should be allowed to do with it as you wish; duplication and redistribution perhaps excepted.

Certainly, you should be able to run your own apps or OS on the platform. If MS concentrated on how much functionality they could offer the consumer rather than how effectively they could restrict it, not only would their platform flourish but they would have enhanced what is available to people in the same way that GPL code enhances what is available for other GPL apps to use, a kind of positive feedback loop where everyone benefits.

Instead they are interested only in treating xbox users as passive consumers who are allowed only to issue money into the xbox coinslot, and are specifically prohibited from contributing anything. The worst thing is that you average Joe is quite capable to relax into this mindset and fork out money so he can continue to twitch at the flickering lights.

I would turn the question around. If you find any of these issues equally repulsive, what are you doing about it?

Re:Question for you.

[silentbozo]

The local EB is blowing 'em out at $150 a box (though you probably have to buy some games as part of the bundle for you to offer that price.) Another EB bundle I saw was $195, including DVD playback...

Re:Question for you.

[sco08y]

Let me get this straight:

The poster assumes that Sweden, ostensibly a first world country, has a decent economy and that commodity goods are available at reasonable prices the way they are here.

Your response to this is to accuse him of ignorance of the fact that your country is a backwater with a poor standard of living.

If you didn't spend all your time worrying about American ignorance, you might be able to fix Swedish poverty. In fact, since we seem to have what you want (a good standard of living) it would be prudent to emulate us rather than scorn us.

Re:Question for you.

[Ryne]

Man, you're doing the same thing as you're accusing the parent of doing. I agree with you that the original poster can't possibly make a statement that's valid for every country in the world. But your comments about Sweden are way off. For example read this:
http://www.globalpolicy.org/socecon/global/ haq.htm

Re:Question for you.

[benjamindees]

that also plays Xbox games

That's just wrong. These people have spent ungodly amounts of time and effort to create something for the SOLE PURPOSE OF SPITING MICROSOFT and you want to buy an Xbox to play games on.

Here are a few points in favor of the $200 Microtel:

While it might not have the same quality components as the XBox, it is a decent tradeoff since it has a "low power" VIA C3 processor and you can actually add PCI cards and drives to it. This makes it more useful for something like a firewall that doesn't have to have an nvidia graphics card.

It has twice (128mb) the memory of an xbox, also expandable.

It comes with a keyboard and mouse: no wiring USB connectors and no $20 USB keyboards.

It comes with a copy of Lindows to play with or give to your grandma.

And, last but not least, by the time you've spent $60 on a mod chip and assuming you have a monitor, it's cheaper.

Re:Question for you.

[sco08y]

I completely agree that by that measure of poverty (how many people are dying off) that Sweden is doing better. The trouble is that being a welfare state, they take away any incentive to work. So it distributes the poor standard of living around more evenly and causes economic stagnation.

My mention of Swedish poverty was meant in a rhetorical sense, rather than trying to be perfectly accurate.

Reverse engineering NOT a given

[m11533]

I would recommend you read up on the legal issue of reverse engineering because it is under attack and it is not at all obvious that it will survive. I believe the latest issue of ACM Communications has an excellent article on the topic. Recent US Government laws are very disconcerting.

Re:All Right!!

[Student_Tech]

Most every modern PC already does component out, in the form of an RGB signal. For reference (some of it from what people were doing to run VGA monitors off of the XBox...)
640x480 = 480p
1280x720 = 720p
1920x1080 = 1080i
(I borrowed the 720p and 1080i from some site, so I'm not sure if they will work)

(and I can't remember any others, but there are)
On http://www.epanorama.net/ if you look you can find something like:
(From http://www.epanorama.net/links/videocircuits.html)

Do-it-Yourself VGA ro PPrPb Cable - This circuit is designed to convert 60Hz VGA (480p) from a computer's VGA port and drive progressive-component outputs to an HDTV (or similar display device).

You can also find links for going component to RGB if you want to run an Xbox (or PS2 or DVD player).

FWIW this is a starting reference, don't try something unless you are willing to take a chance that it might screw something up really bad.

That's not reverse engineering

[qengho]

Mr. Gates himself related the story of reverse engineering MSDOS by dumpster diving for source code

That's theft of trade secrets, if true. "Reverse engineering" is treating the object in question (program or device) as a black box with inputs and outputs and reproducing its behavior exactly, without access to source documents.

Re:That's not reverse engineering

[Detritus]

It's no longer a trade secret if you leave source code listings in publicly accessible trash containers.

Re:DONT SUPPORT REDHAT!

[FooBarWidget]

Actually China hasn't "assimilated" any country since... a couple of hundred years. Tibet has been part of China for centuries.

This can be a smart move...

[Lisias]

Microsoft have the money to make hundreds of "security patches" to XBox over the time. One can say Microsoft is screwing up things, but the fact is that Microsoft can had made the choice to spend a big amount of money on many little patches that will made life a hell for the people that wants to earn money from the hacks (hey! the mod chips must be manufactured, huh?) instead to spend a big amount of money on a single big patch that will be hacked anyway. You can "secure" things by making it too much expensive to hack it by the common man.

Hackers have already done that for you . . .

[Idou]

it's called Linux. You just haven't downloaded it yet.

Re:Hackers have already done that for you . . .

[rizawbone]

it's called Linux. You just haven't downloaded it yet.

i'm sorry, are you saying installing linux will FIX my desktop usability problems?

heh.

are you here all week? i won't forget to tip the waitress.

Re:Hackers have already done that for you . . .

[Anonymous Coward]

"are you saying installing linux will FIX my desktop usability problems?"

yes.

Re:Hackers have already done that for you . . .

[Anonymous Coward]

"are you saying installing linux will FIX my desktop usability problems?"

yes.

I can't believe you said that with a straight face. Liar.

Re:Hackers have already done that for you . . .

[Anonymous Coward]

It will solve your usability problems, because in order to even use it, you'll need to learn enough about computers not to be a total noob.

Re:Hackers have already done that for you . . .

[PatJensen]

Linux won't. But Mac OS X will. :)

(Some Apple zealotry for today, since the moderators are on a roll..)

-Pat

Re:Hackers have already done that for you . . .

[Idou]

All I can say is . . . Mandrake 9.0. It fixes the usability problems that can be FIXED.

I can't comment on your other usability problems . . . but after Mandrake 9.0, it is no longer the OS's fault, as far as I am concerned (see: urpmi).

Have a nice life.

food for thought

[stubear]

You know, it's vocal, endorsed and promoted projects like this that give the OSS and free software community a bad name. YOU might view it as tinkering or whatever but the general populace views it as "pissing in the pool" so to speak. The XBOX Linux project might be for running Linux on the XBOX but it is viewed as much for that as it is for harming Microsoft's profits in the gaming console market. Perhaps the OSS and free software community should consider a different approach to establishing their self-image and promoting their cause.

Re:food for thought

[tuffy]

You know, it's vocal, endorsed and promoted projects like this that give the OSS and free software community a bad name. YOU might view it as tinkering or whatever but the general populace views it as "pissing in the pool" so to speak.

Judging from the X-Box's market share (or lack thereof), the general populace cares about as much about the X-Box as they do about Linux (which isn't a whole lot).

And even though the number of people using X-Boxes as cheap PCs is small, Microsoft certainly appreciates not having those consoles as unsold inventory (which would cost them even more).

Re:food for thought

[Anonymous Coward]

The OSS community is harming Microsoft's profits? Good! That's the point! (For some OSS zealots)

Re:food for thought

[nagora]

You know, it's vocal, endorsed and promoted projects like this that give the OSS and free software community a bad name.

If you mean by "bad name" that they stand for the right of people that BUY a product to use it without fear of being hounded by an lawbreaking organisation such as Microsoft, or that they aim to defend the written law of fair use from being destroyed by bribes and corruption at the highest levels of the judicial system then I'm all for being called "Mudd".

Perhaps the OSS and free software community should consider a different approach to establishing their self-image and promoting their cause.

Perhaps you should consider your position as a marketing droid's wet dream. Perhaps you should consider your role as an instrument of corporate interferance in everyday life. Perhaps you should consider smelling the coffee.

It would appear that you have lost sight of what (not just) Microsoft are trying do here: they are trying to say "You paid us fair and square for our machine but we still own it and, in fact, we now own a little bit of you because we can tell you what (not) to do with our little box of tricks."

As a great man once said "Fuck that".

TWW

Re:food for thought

[Rui del-Negro]

On the contrary. This is simply enabling the Xbox to do something that the PS2 already does. If anything, it should increase Xbox sales.

RMN
~~~

It doesn't matter how smart you are.

[hackwrench]

At least once you reach a certain level of smartness. After that, it's just a matter of applying what's there, and the question is one of

BFD, no mod chips.

[supabeast!]

This would be really cool if Microsoft had not shut Lik Sang down, because without a mod chip this doesn't really do me much good.

Mod Chips DO give access to protected content.

[Kelmenson]

Pretty much every mod chip out has always made the systems skip their "authentic CD/DVD" check, so a backup (or illegal copy...) of a game will work. Now, with XBox Linux, there are definitely legitimate and legal uses for a modded XBox, which in a reasonable legal system would mean that DMCA wouldn't have an effect here. But we all know that DMCA and reasonable don't belong in a sentence together...

Microsoft 0, Rest of the World 1

[Alan Partridge]

one nil, one nil, one nil, one nil

Re:Microsoft 0, Rest of the World 1

[Anonymous Coward]

I would say:
Microsoft 0, Rest of the World 2
since it's the second time it's been cracked

You Xbox hackers have gotta learn

[Anonymous Coward]

That the real object of the game is not to crack it fast and then broadcast the fact, that just starts M$ working on the next version. Seems to me that points should be awarded when there are LOTS of Xboxes out there & THEN you tell the world how to crack them.

Re:All Right!!

[Anonymous Coward]

You're so excited about not having to spend more than $300 on a PC and then you're mentioning hooking it up to a "nice plasma/front projector"....cuckoo...cuckoo
Make up your mind, either quality and performance, or price

Not all right.

[Anonymous Coward]

Find me a PC that can do progressive scan and/or component-out

Progressive scan simply mans that each line is scanned after the other. All computers do that; it's consoles that also have interlaced output (where all the odd lines are scanned before the even lines, or vice-versa).

Since the component standards are 3/4xBNC (for YUV[sync]) or one SCART plug (for RGB), it would be rather hard to fit them on a graphics card. However, for most TVs, a component (RGB or YUV) connection produces exactly the same results as an s-video connection.

What contract did I sign?

[Inoshiro]

I don't recall the EB guys hounding me to sign some sort of contract when I bought my Xbox. In fact, I don't recall any sort of contract in the box with it that I signed.

The closest thing I could find was the ABOUT XBOX in the dashboard, which talks about how the softvare on the Xbox is protected by copyright law. Since I have no intention of pirating the Xbox dashboard, I think I'm legal.

Plus, once I own something, it's mine. As I've said before, I could rip off the top of my Xbox, put all my night soil in there, and grow flowers from the rich loam. Microsoft can't say anything to me about the use of it, because I own it.

Re:What contract did I sign?

[Anonymous Coward]

And so far they haven't said a thing to you about using it, pud. They've only changed the internals of the newer Xbox and closed down Lik-Sang for violating their copyright on their BIOS code. It was a shame to see Lik-Sang close, but they fucked up.

Some damn idea

[Ektanoor]

I know this is a little bit unscientific, and rather illusory but...

Xbox is small, nitty and costs only $200. It possesses a 3D chip, a not so bad 733MHz processor, ethernet connection and an hard drive. Frankly it is not so bad for a cheap cluster... Sincerly, I have seen a few clusters for which the cluster units were a little worse than XBox...

Maybe the chance for M$ to reach Top 500? Imagine, an horde of penguins helping up Redmond to reach the heights of computer industry...

Re:Some damn idea

[MyHair]

Um, did he just say "imagine a beowulf cluster of these" (albeit with different wording) and get modded to +4 interesting?

Re:Some damn idea

[sco08y]

Once you hide the scores, switch off the green gunk and browse at -1 Nested, Slashdot becomes far more enjoyable.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

You might as well ask

[Inoshiro]

Why the bear went over the mountain.

The answer is to see what he could see.

If you do not understand the zen of running Linux an whatever you want to after a little effort, then do not comment.

Re:You might as well ask

[Anonymous Coward]

If you have to ask that question this BBS is not for you!

Re:You might as well ask

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, i thing the bear went across the mountain to avoid being used as an X-box controller ala http://www.penny-arcade.com/view.php3?date=2002-03 -25&res=l

Does parent post violate DMCA?

[Anonymous Coward]

Just curious. Looks like it does.

Re:We need to bring back Guilds..

[Windcatcher]

The fact that we're being called "consumers" instead of "customers" sadly illustrates the cynical attitude of many corporate types. "Shut up and buy our stuff, you nose-picking, beer-guzzling sheep!"

To paraphrase someone else, most people, according to them, "are a bunch of pathetic hamsters who only know to press the pellet bar and chitter excitedly to one another about the size of the pellet they received."

I'm a customer, Mr. Gates, and as far as I'm concerned, entropy will claim the universe before I pay one red cent for another of your products.

Anyone care to tell me what the big deal is?

[Anonymous Coward]

Its just a hardware revision.. the sony playstation had quite a few (1- 3- 5- 7- and 9-series), the playstation2 had quite a few, and now the xbox has its first hardware revision. Like with the xbox, it took a while before the playstaion mods supported the new revisions. which is obvious, since the board layout changed.
Its pretty standard to have revisions through time.. things get more optimised, compact, cost-efficient, god knows what else. Or dont you think its normal to update hardware ?
big fat deal! stop being paranoid, its just a new xbox revision for gods sake...

Re:Anyone care to tell me what the big deal is?

[Nintendork]

This new revision had the security key changed. Microsoft had to scrap a lot of the older parts to make this change. The change had only been implemented in the plant that supplies Australia and it's already cracked. That's why it's news.

Market Share

[bstadil]

Judging from the X-Box's market share

This can not be right. 50% for PS2 is WAY low.

PS2 has sold 40Mu worldwide, 10Mu in last 4-5 month.

XBox total sale WW is around 3.0 Mu, of which 2Mu or so is in the US.

PS2's US sales are 40% or so of total, equal to 16Mu (give or take) in the US. This gives PS2 80% share and 20% for Xbox, assuming GC same as XBox.

Re:DONT SUPPORT REDHAT!

[KingJoshi]

Actually China hasn't "assimilated" any country since... a couple of hundred years. Tibet has been part of China for centuries.

yeah, and that's why china had to use an army to convince Tibet and the Dalai Lama is currently in exile. Because Tibet was already a province of China. And even though Tibet was already a province of China, the Dalai Lama wrote letters to Great Britain, the U.S. and others asking for help during that "non-invasion".

The take-over of Tibet, the destruction of the culture and society and trying to position their own as the next Dalai Lama and the lack of interest by the international community is a downright travesty. China's actions on Tibet, in my opinion, is one of the worst actions they've committed in that past century, if not the worst.

what is BST?

[Duryo]

Dumb and totally off-topic question - what exactly is BST?

Re:what is BST?

[Dean Sas]

dunno where you read BST but it is used to refer to British Summer Time

Re:what is BST?

[Duryo]

In the announcement, he says

I am proud to announce that at 10:45BST

Oh, you thought the US was the whole world?

[pjammer]

Wha ... wha ... what do you mean ... IT'S NOT!!?!?!?!

I mean, that's why the Internet is called America Online, right? It's supposed to be about America! :P

News?

[fire-eyes]

My feelings for MS are widely know, but for once I'm not trying to troll.

Given the facts, how is this news?

In my eyes, it isn't.

What WOULD be news would be "secure xbox cracked after exhaustive 6 month effort by 3 teams of 1200 people".

Agreed?

w00t!

[bbtom]

Imagine a Beowulf cluster of these...

Still, it's good that they did this.

Only Microsoft

[Wolfgang]

While reading a lot (not all) of the postings here I wonder if only Microsoft implements such strong security
I mean a company like Micrsosoft, is there any larger one? Or ist that Microsoft?
What about other companies comparable, like Oracle, is their security as weak as the one of Micky Mouse^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^Hrosoft?
America, where are you going?

It costs them money to keep changing the locks

[NigelJohnstone]

"They keep on doing this until they find a way to lock it down to the point were nobody can hack it. "

It costs them big money (or rather NVIDIA in this case - Microsoft is trying to stick them with the bill) to change the locks. break it often enough and MS look like idiots.

Even if they finally solve this, nobody will buy copyprotection from idiots.

Re:I love you Lindsay!

[Anonymous Coward]

or thinks linux stands a chance on the desktop.

Krap.

You are just being stupid

[Anonymous Coward]

The xbox was hacked using HARDWARE. Im pretty sure id notice if a hacker came down to my house and installed a new bios mod to my pc.

Re:You are just being stupid

[DeathToBill]

On the other hand, of course, you are sounding at least as stupid... you want palladium?

What about Mathematica?

[ari_j]

Anyone know of a crack for Mathematica? Since you basically have to have a PhD in Math to get even a secretarial position at Wolfram, let alone a programming job, they're the real baseline for 'hiring the smartest people you can find'.

Re:What about Mathematica?

[Anonymous Coward]

Um. Go pick up Kazza lite and search for it. It's there. I didn't break it but someone did.

Re:What about Mathematica?

[forgotmypassword]

Well Stephen Wolfram is a crack. Have you read his book.

Re:What about Mathematica?

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, version 4.0 is available

http://astalavista.box.sk/cgi-bin/robot?srch=Mat he matica&submit=+search+

Given the state of MS code..

[xant]

I'd venture that they have to reverse engineer their product with every new release. It's probably easier than figuring out what modules connect where...

so was this a "Trusted" Xbox?

[Anonymous Coward]

because while nothing is ever hacker/cracker proof, I find MS products to be a playground for data driven attacks, brute force network/system attacks and general instability that causes unintentional but very costly damage. I wonder if that is a sign that the Microsoft corp really just does NOT understand the definition of "secure", if MS is simply incapable of creating secure products... or more likely if they don't give a crap and put money into marketing, legal and general middle management that would better be spent in QA, design, and implementation of their products.

Different definitions

[acoustiq]

In short, in under a week we were able to normalize the new box to enable it to interoperate with Linux properly.

I think you and MS disagree on what it means to interoperate with Linux properly...

MS's Problem with your view is......

[Anonymous Coward]

As many of us know, Console vendors lose money on the actual hardware for a long time before they break even. It's been said that for microsoft to break even on a sale of X-Box HARDWARE, they have to sell like 10 or so (don't remember the exact #) pieces of software..

If you're hacking your x-box to run linux, then chances are, you're not buying the games, or at least not enough for MS to break even or even turn a profit.

That's how the I-Opener folks got their Eyes Opened. People could buy the hardware but at many places weren't required to buy into the service. They took a loss thinking people would automaticaly sign up... Many didn't and took the hardware and ran....

A.C.

Thank you.

[FreeLinux]

As I said, I was not trying to flame or insult you, or anyone else. Despite my disclaimer, I still got a few flames (I love Slashdotters) :^)

But, thanks for your answer, I appreciate your time. I really wanted to know what your personal motivation was, and now I know. I do agree with your views regarding MS and their licensing. As for what I am doing about it, I'm NOT purchasing their products. They can take Licensing 6.0 and stuff it!

Ooh, Dat wascally pengwin!

[Anonymous Coward]

Said the FUD

No EULA on hardware

[Anonymous Coward]

Sorry, no such thing.

It may be illegal in some backwards countries to mod your own posessions.

But in civilized countries, your possessions are yours to do with as you want.

Consider this...

[Mac Degger]

...practise :)

Stupid

[Anonymous Coward]

"My motherboard cost almost that much by itself."

Well so fucking what?

A good motherboard can be had for under $50. That's a GOOD one. You can get a PIII capable motherboard at a hamfest for probably $10. Get the whole friggin PC for $50.

Try to have a sense of perspective, goofball.

If this is "food"

[Anonymous Coward]

I'd just as soon starve.

I paid $300 for my X-Box, why can't I solder it to my heart's content?

Or am I only licensing my hardware?

Can a Modded X-Box...

[tkrotchko]

Can it still play X-Box games? It might be fun to try, but the reason I bought the X-Box was for games. of course, I only own one game. Still waiting for that killer app...

Illicit software

[Vegan Pagan]

How long until Tengen makes an unlicensed version of Tetris for Xbox that's better than the official version?

ACM Communications

[BlueboyX]

It is in the latest issue. It says 'reverse engineering under siege,' It doesn't attempt to predict who will win the legal matters, but explains what the threat is and how it will cause extreme harm to the tech industry if reverse engineering is taken away. Most slashdotters probably know most of that, but it is an interesting read.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Re:I love you Lindsay!

[Anonymous Coward]

How about on the living room floor, then?

Re:Confucius say ...

[sco08y]

Smart midgets wear snorkels.

Only Linux?

[Senator_B]

Anyone try running anything else besides linux? Like windows 3.1 or something?

Of course I'm serious too!

Dude

[Anonymous Coward]

Go read some history. Or better yet, actually visit the place before you make comments as inflammatory as these.

And the score so far...

[di0s]

Security through obscurity:-2
Determined hackers:+2

Exactly like the Sat pirates

[jmorris42]

This will work out exactly like the sat piracy in the BUD (Big Ugly Dish) era. It's now general knowledge that General Instruments was making all of the 'pirate' chips for the Video Cipher hacks, then breaking them again a few months later. The chaos that ensued with having to replace your hacked chips every few months eventually caused all but the most diehard to give up. And I wouldn't be all that suprised to learn DirecTV tried to do the same thing except it got out of hand. No fear though, although the bootleggers got a few years of free signal with only a few forced upgrades, they will eventually close that back down.

Same thing here. M$ doesn't care if numbnut gets Linux going on his X-Box. The hardcore will always suceed at a unrealistic cost in time and money. So long as they discourage joe average end user they win.

Of course the difference here is Sat TV needs a hack that can decode the signals coming down NOW. An X-Box hack only needs to be able to work once. Changes the odds towards the hacks, but does it do enough? How many want to look up their box in ranges of manufacturing dates & serial numbers to see IF their machine is hackable and which mod they need to get. Especially considering those lists will become notorious for inaccuracy.

Corrigendum

[ari_j]

Sorry, I made a mistake in my phonetic spelling. The 'ch' in the last word should have been a 'k'. They'd be pronounced the same in Latin, but not in English.

Re:Keeping cool

[Anonymous Coward]

You mean AMD's chips used to run cooler than Intel's?

Xbox Security - The Movie

[Cheese Cracker]

Subtitle: Cracked in 60 seconds.

Tamper-proof hardware

[mcrbids]

.. is like an unbreakable rope. It doesn't exist.

Get used to it. (MS is hopefully now learning something most of us learned long ago...)

Xbox Cluster

[Anonymous Coward]

At $200 a pop wtih the ability to run linux on them I'm surprized someone hasn't built a render or compiler farm out of these using Maya or distcc

It's not just MS

[mark-t]

When it comes to having physical access to the device, no form of security short of causing *completely* irrevocable consequences can ever be adequate. Most such completely irrevocable consequences would have to violate one or more fundamental human rights, so it's not particularly likely to happen in this society.

Even that wouldn't stop the security mechanisms from being cracked in theory, but with harsh enough consequences, it's unlikely you'd find a person insane enough to keep trying.

doability

[Bishop]

At the time I could not find the word in a dictionary. I agree it seems valid. However as you may have guessed English is not my strong point. The [sic] was on me. As in: "This word might not exists, but I am going to use it anyway. My english teacher be damned!"

Re:All Right!!

[Anonymous Coward]

I got Xbox Media Player to work, why would I want to install Linux on the Xbox ?

It was the accent.

[Crag]

The post wasn't interesting, but his or her Monty Python accent was:

"[the] Xbox is small, nitty..."
"an hard drive"
"an horde of penguines"

Next I'd like to see Eliza Doolittle post "They hardly ever have an hurricaine down in Hedeford."

Freedom to innovate - let's see a laundry list

[SgtChaireBourne]

That's right, MS's original flagship products weren't written by MS. They started as they meant to continue.

And MSIE was innovated from NCSA Mosaic via Spyglass. FTP/Telnet/TCPIP were innovated from UC Berkeley, disk compression was innovated from Stacc, and so on. Even Frontpage, Powerpoint, and others were innovated.

Let's see a laundry list of the original companies. A complete list of products or components and the original company or institutions from which Microsoft later innovated would be very interesting. Oh, and the purchase prices would be interesting as well.

'Scuse me while I go innovate some office supplies.

You left one thing out

[Andy Dodd]

Form factor

The Xbox is in a form factor that's decent for an entertainment center. It's big as far as consoles go, but it's far smaller/more portable than your average PC.

There are PCs with such form factors, you say?

You'll be spending a lot more than $300 for a PC with the appropriate form factor. (The good Shuttle units are around $300 alone and that's without CPU, HDD, and DVD drive)

Re:We need to bring back Guilds..

[cascadefx]

blockquoteth:

The fact that we're being called "consumers" instead of "customers" sadly illustrates the cynical attitude of many corporate types. "Shut up and buy our stuff, you nose-picking, beer-guzzling sheep!"

Seems the perfect time to bring up a couple of interesting resources that point exactly along these lines.

There are a fascinating group of documentaries and a book about the rise of consumerism in America (/the world) and how it is adversely affecting us. I highly recommend the book Affluenza: The All-Consuming Epidemic and the two documentaries on which it is based; Affluenza: The Disease of Materialism and Escape from Affluenza.

An interesting and disturbing part of the first film shows a marketing conference from Disney (actual footage) called "Kid Power" in which the head "marketeer" of Disney talks about how Disney owns America's children and how anti-social behavior in pursuit of a product in young consumers is a good thing. If junior wants a Disney product and is willing to lie, cheat, and steal to get it, then you know you have them. Creepy stuff.

I would also recommend the book Culture Jam How to Reverse America's Suicidal Consumer Binge-And Why We Must from the editor of Adbusters Magazine.

MS is still 3rd or 2nd in consoles

[huckamania]

I hardly see how this is interesting news. MS is providing a box to play games. They would like to make sure that people pay for the games and also that the box is not used for other purposes. This is different than the PC market as the former has always been proprietary and the latter was always an open market. This is also different as the h/w in question was licensed to a single company to manufacture.

You cannot buy an XBox and reverse engineer it and produce multiple XBoxen. This would be actionable in any country in the world where any of you live. Is it legal for MS to say you can't hack their box? No. Is it legal for MS to say if you hack their box, other things might not work? Yes.

Think about it and try to remember that Sony is winning, Linux is growing and the world will keep spinning even if they don't.

Cheers!

Last Post!

[alpg]

The day-to-day travails of the IBM programmer are so amusing to most of
us who are fortunate enough never to have been one -- like watching
Charlie Chaplin trying to cook a shoe.

- this post brought to you by the Automated Last Post Generator...