Distributed TiVo Code Cracking

Twostep writes "With the newest version of the TiVo software (Version 3.2), TiVo has once again changed the secret password to enter "backdoor" mode, which lets advanced users enable hidden features. Unlike last time, people were not able to quickly find the new code, so a distributed computing project was started to find the backdoor codes. You can read about it Here, grab the Linux or Windows clients and pitch in some CPU time for a good cause."

Comments

Explain to me again why this is a good cause?

[mumblestheclown]

• corporations are evil?
• individuals or companies that attempt any sort of security should be shown that all their base, does indeed, belong to us?
• business models that involve selling a piece of hardware below cost to make money on additional software or services are the work of satan?
• because hackers can do something means that they should do it. laws and conventions do not apply to them because it is unlikely that they will get caught.
• if there's one thing the world needs, it's more TV.
• information deserves to be free. other people's information, that is.

Because you're entitled to use your own hardware

[phr2]

You paid for it, it's yours, and you should be allowed to do whatever you want with it.

If some vendor decides, rightly or wrongly, that giving hardware away is a sensible business model, that doesn't in any way entitle them to any control over what you do with it once you take it home. Think of the stupid CueCat bar code wands from Radio Shack. The "legitimate" application intended for those things is long dead, but people continue to do useful things with the wands using software based on reverse engineering them.

No Offense

[jchawk]

Why are people still buying these devices if they don't offer the features they want or expect out of the box?

- This is a serious question, mod as such.

Re:No Offense

[wsloand]

Why are people still buying these devices if they don't offer the features they want or expect out of the box?

For the same reason that people buy cars then modify them. For the same reason that people update the software on their computers. For the same reason that people get accessories for or modify anything that they own.

Re:hmmm.... is this redundant?

[JabberWokky]

Yes, this is cracking - it's getting the password to a machine that you have bought and paid for and is your private property. In other words, to move it to a metaphor for the physical world, people are trying to unlock their own bike locks.

A different, and possibly more interesting question is this: Why does the builder of the bike chain it to a bike rack *after* you have bought it and not give you the combination to the new lock? The scary thing is that according to the laws passed recently in the United States (by congressmen who likely did not understand the ramifications of what they were voting on), it is not only illegal to unlock your bike, but the original builders of the bike are allowed to lock it down any way they want after you have purchaced it, and it is illegal for you to even discuss the lock with other people or try to unlock it by yourself so you can use the bike. It is generally illegal (not always, but often) to take apart the bike to turn it into a tandem bike. And if you discuss bike locks in general including starting up a website or discussing them via email it's not only illegal, but you might be a political activist, one of the threats to the United States according to the intelligence community:

Political activism on the Internet has generated a wide range of activity, from using e-mail and web sites to organize, to web page defacements and denial-of-service attacks.

Life in these United States scares me of late. People have just about convinced themselves that they don't need to have physical power (the right to bear arms), and society is now casting organized groups in a bad light. First the right to bear arms, now the right to assemble.

And you, a presumably intelligent person, cannot understand that you should have the right to crack into your own private property? Or that there is anything wrong with the fact that you have to do so?

Ah, well...

--
Evan

Re:Idiots

[subuni]

In TiVo's case, would just removing the backdoor altogether work instead of just putting a new, totally hackable and insecure password on there?

I don't work for TiVo, so I don't know their intentions. But I can speculate. You can do some nasty damage to your TiVo through use of some of the back doors (Node Navigator being the most famous method). So, you get Joe Blow who accidently does this to his TiVo, screws it up, and calls support -- Their costs have now increased.

It's too difficult to remove the backdoors. They're quite useful inhouse during dev/test cycles (a QA tester notices a bug, they can easily view the log files, etc). Two branches of the software, one inhouse with the backdoors, and one w/o them for the public is a lot to deal with. What if you applied a patch to one branch, forgot about the other. Now QA has to test both branches, to make sure they're the same. QA people whine, a lot (rightfully so sometimes). They won't like that.

So, whats the best option? While doing inhouse testing, use a nice simple code (1234). Right before you're ready to GM it, change it the something "impossible" (i.e. uses characters that can't be entered through the TiVo). The code-base is the same, so QA can get away with just running a quick set of happy-path tests. And, this now reduces Joe Blow's chance of killing his TiVo (since he can't enable backdoors), it lowers support costs, and everybody (inside TiVo) is happy. A "win" situation for TiVo.

Of course, a "hacker" can go in and change the code to something that isn't "impossible", but if they screw up their TiVo and call support, support doesn't have to help them this time. They voided their warranty when they opened the case, to pull the drive, to change the backdoor code. Another "win" siutation for TiVo.

Whether or not this is the case, I don't know... But, it sounds very likely to me.

Re:Because you're entitled to use your own hardwar

[photon317]

Wrong. I *can* do whatever I want to a 2003 ford mustang. I can remove the muffler, modify the camshaft... hell I can strap a rocket on the back if it pleases me. Obviously the manufacturer won't honor my warranty once I cross certain lines, and obviously because of laws for the common good, I won't be able to legally drive it on public highways after a certain point as well. But at any stage in whatever process, Ford will be more than happy to supply me all the technical data and help I need when it comes to how their car is designed and built - although some of the more advanced manuals come at a reasonable cost.

If TiVo were the same, then they should allow me to turn the box into a linux unreal tournament machine or an X.10 controller or whatever the hell else I want to do with it, and provide specs and documentation as neccesary to boot. They would of course void my warranty and/or tech support when I open the case or make invasive software changes - and at some point down the mod path they may no longer allow me to subscribe to their services, and may even disclaim to me that it's no longer legal for me to hook my TiVo up to a cable/satellite network (however dubious that may be) - but they wouldn't stop me from doing whatever I wanted with the hardware in my own home.

Re:Idiots

[Martin Blank]

It's too difficult to remove the backdoors. They're quite useful inhouse during dev/test cycles (a QA tester notices a bug, they can easily view the log files, etc). Two branches of the software, one inhouse with the backdoors, and one w/o them for the public is a lot to deal with. What if you applied a patch to one branch, forgot about the other. Now QA has to test both branches, to make sure they're the same. QA people whine, a lot (rightfully so sometimes). They won't like that.

Not intending flamebait, but isn't this exactly what we're usually complaining about companies doing? This is one of the highest examples of insecure design. It's not that difficult to remove the backdoor code from the public release, if you code it right to begin with. I know it's just a TiVo, but at some point, a lot of these things that we refer to as "just a" will be network connected, and it's best to start early on best practices, especially since the TiVo is networkable.

Yes, people like to get into their TiVos (and other gadgets) and tinker with them. A friend who has a TiVo does it all the time, and when I see word of a new hack on Slashdot, I usually let him know. That being said, he's perfectly well aware that what he's doing can seriously screw him if he breaks something. If TiVo really wanted to lock people out, they'd disable the backdoors to begin with, and if they really needed to see the logs on a defective unit, they could load it up on a custom system that can pull the logs from the drives after putting them in a read-only configuration. It wouldn't stop everyone from getting in, but it would stop all but the most determined.