Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Xbox Hacking Book Prepares to Fly Off Shelves

Posted by CowboyNeal on from the x-marks-the-mod-spot dept.

SecurityFocus posted an article today about a new book that covers hacking the Xbox. The book's author, Andrew "Bunnie" Huang, reports that it's selling well, even though the release date has not yet arrived. Presumably, this is because the book covers soldering techniques and adding features like blue LEDs and modchips to Xboxes, most of which violate the DMCA. If this stuff is interesting to you, you can order a copy from Huang's site. It amazes me that a book such as this could be banned, yet car service manuals can be sold in most bookstores.

27 of 319 comments (clear)

  1. The heart of the debate? by mao+che+minh · · Score: 5, Interesting
    I find it amusing that the open source crowd shows such great interest in a closed piece of hardware, hardware that is defended by DMCA-supported lawyer jargon and manufactured by "The Great Satan" of digital freedom. It goes to show you how strong and creative this community is, and highlights upon some of the beneficial fundamental values that the open source crowd holds: freedom and expression in computing. Sappy huh. =)

    At the heart of the modding debate (or very close to it), I think that Microsoft wants to prevent hacking and modding of the Xbox because it reveals to the consumers the true identity of the Xbox: a PC that is being sold far too cheaply; an entry into the console market that would be completely unsustainable if Microsoft were not a monopoly (I.E. able to sustain gross losses in many other markets in order to direct/force attention back to their OS and Office suite).

    1. Re:The heart of the debate? by Ryan+Amos · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Microsoft isn't dumb. Hell, before it was released that's what people saw it as, but now the hardware in the Xbox is nothing to write home about (you can getmuch better for about the same price on walmart.com.) Besides, every console since the SNES has been sold at a loss, they make the difference up on the licensing and SDKs. At $99, Sony lost about $17 on each PSX they sold. Ditto for Sega (Saturn and Dreamcast) and Nintendo (GC and N64.) But you buy a few games and they've already made it back. So this really isn't as big a deal as you make it sound.

      Yes, this means that only companies with mega-bucks can make consoles. Why do you think Sony and Microsoft (two of the largest companies on earth) are still around when Sega (a poorer company that had much more experience in the market) is gone. Nintendo is only around because they're still riding the momentum from the SNES (and the massive wave of cash that is the Gameboy.) Consoles are expensive, if you want to enter the fray you better have near a billion dollars to sink into it before you start reaping the rewards.

    2. Re:The heart of the debate? by Gizzmonic · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Actually, Nintendo has never sold a console at a loss. That is totally anathema to their corporate personality.

      The only companies to have sold consoles at a loss are Sega (and only with the Dreamcast) and Microsoft (only with the Xbox). The PS2 may have been sold at a loss early in its lifespan, but it was a very small loss.

      As consoles continue to be manufactured, the parts get cheaper, and the process gets streamlined. Thus consoles become more and more profitable over their lifetime. Nintendo has the best profit margins out of the three on their console, despite the fact that it's being sold for much less...

      --
      (-1, Raw and Uncut is the only way to read)
    3. Re:The heart of the debate? by istartedi · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I find it amusing that the home gardening crowed shows such a great interest in inexpensive "bedding plants" that are defended by nursery-supported patents and grown by "The Great Satans" of home lumberyards. It goes to show you how strong and creative this community is, and highlights upon some of the beneficial fundamental values that the gardening crowd holds: freedom of expression in horticulture. Sappy huh. =)

      At the heart of the gardening debate (or very close to it), I think that Big Box Stores want to prevent propogation and resale of bedding plants because it reveals to customers the true identity of the plants: greenery that is being sold far too cheaply; an entry into the gardening market that would be completely unsustainable if Big Box Stores were not monopolies (I.E. able to sustain gross losses in many other markets in order to direct/force attention back to their housewares and appliances).

      Get it? These kinds of business practices are not unique to Microsoft or computing, or to monopolies. The bit about bedding plants is real. I was reading about it in the Washington Post just the other day. Ever wonder how stores make money selling potted azaleas for $5? Answer: they don't. They're just hoping to pull you in so you'll buy a mower or something that really makes them money. Remember, from the POV of SCO, Linux looks like the same kind of unfair pricing that the XBox looks like to a lot of people on Slashdot, and in both cases people are willing to twist the law to "fix" the problem. The real problem? The real "heart of the debate"?

      Business law.

      A more broad, sweeping fix? Make it illegal for anyone to sell anything at a loss by default, and require an application for an exception to the law to permit "loss leaders". An exception process is needed because some loss-leaders like soup kitchens are deemed to have social benefits, and others are deemed not to harm the market, such as mints on hotel pillows. That means you too, Mr. Nonprofit. There's nothing that says companies have to be monopolies to cause "harm to the consumer" and there's nothing that says markets depressed at the hands of non-profits are beneficial to the consumer either.

      Now that's quite a kettle of fish we've gotten ourselves into, isn't it?

      --
      For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
    4. Re:The heart of the debate? by Pooua · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Make it illegal for anyone to sell anything at a loss by default, and require an application for an exception to the law to permit "loss leaders".

      Several years ago, I was suckered into becoming a retailer for ColorCo thermochromatic t-shirts. I paid a lot of money to get a license so I could buy the shirts, then more money on the shirts. I had to buy some large quantity of t-shirts at a time, too. Unfortunatetly, I was unable to sell them, at least not at a profit. Over the years, I managed slowly to whittle down my inventory in exchange for ridiculous swaps. I gave a Navajo woman a half-dozen of my color-changing t-shirts in exchange for one of her silver-plated plastic necklaces (I went to a jewelry store to see if I could get anything for the necklace. I couldn't.)

      If you had your way, I would have been stuck with a gross of t-shirts that I could not even give away.

      BTW, I'm not in the t-shirt business, anymore.

      --
      Taking stuff apart since 1969 (TM)
    5. Re:The heart of the debate? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Sega made the Dreamcast, which kicked ass, but they've had to resort to pure software.
      Microsoft makes the XBox, which is more 'fucking lame' than the Gamecube, they can't even WRITE good software, yet they have more money than Jesus.

      So what makes you think that Nintendo will have to resort to software only?

      Oh, right, nothing, because you're not thinking, only trolling.

  2. Re: Car Manuals by RobPiano · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Ignoring the parent comparining the cost and the fact that I'm for free software...

    The reason this is different than selling a car manual is that you are not moding your car to run equipment without paying for it or that is restricted for any reasons. If a car manual instructed people how to get military gps coordinates or pick up restricted broadcasts, you can bet it wouldn't be on store shelves.

    Regardless, this would this even be news if the xbox was a Playstation?

    Rob

  3. re: censorship by scubacuda · · Score: 4, Interesting
    It amazes me that a book such as this could be banned, yet car service manuals can be sold in most bookstores.

    If we don't believe in freedom of expression for people we despise, we don't believe in it at all--Noam Chomsk

    Free speech is the whole thing, the whole ball game. Free speech is life itself--Salman Rushdie

    You can cage the singer but not the song--Harry Belafonte
  4. DCMA, what's next? by deathcloset · · Score: 4, Interesting

    How is modding your X-Box illegal under the DCMA? I don't doubt that somehow it is (Frankly I wouldn't be suprised if having a dream with a top 100 song in it is illegal too) but is it only illegal if you actually use it for infringement purposes, or is the modification of the device itself illegal?

    if the actual harware mod is illegal then WTF? I should be able to do whatever I want with my hardware (physically). I bought it, I own it. I can hit it repeatedly with a bat If I wish. I can dunk it in a bathtub full of milk, I can throw it through any window in my house I so choose (That is if I own the house, but If I have enough income to fill a tub with milk then I think I would have enough money own the house (maybe in this example I own a barn)).

    1. Re:DCMA, what's next? by Bendy+Chief · · Score: 3, Interesting

      IANAL, but as I understand it, any act preventing their BIOS from running in exactly the way they intended is a violation. It doesn't matter what you do afterwards. (Unless that's further criminal activity)

      Furthermore, I am not a US citizen (Canuck), so I haven't researched the DMCA as exhaustively as I might otherwise have. Still, I believe it's as draconian as I implied above.

    2. Re:DCMA, what's next? by Lochin+Rabbar · · Score: 3, Interesting

      The notion that the restriction of which software you can run on the X-Box is a red herring designed to divert attention from what, in the EU at least, is an illegal restraint of trade. The BIOS protections are there too ensure that no software producer can sell software that runs on the X-Box without handing over a significant proportion of its revenue to Microsoft. By the time the distributor and the retailer have added their markup to this extorted sum the end customer is paying a lot of money for the game, and the profits of the games manufacturer are being squeezed. The piracy issue is irrelevant.

      As to the ROM I have every right to modify it long as I don't do so for the purpose of copy-protection circumvention, since the X-Box is designed to run software not to copy it this is a non issue. What I don't have the right to do is to distribute copies of the modified ROM, though I can distribute patches for it.

    3. Re:DCMA, what's next? by dirk · · Score: 2, Interesting

      As long as you are not using your X-Box to play pirated games (or access other copyrighted material), you are not using it to circumvent anything. You are free to do anything you want with your X-Box. This includes paint it, put a blue LED in it, or even put a modchip in it. Now if that modchip contains code copyrighted by MS (which they always do as far as I know) then you are violating not only the DMCA, but copyright laws as well. You can freely remove the X-Box chip and place a blank one in (not that it will do you any good). But the modchips contain a modified version of the X-Box BIOS, and that makes them illegal, even without the DMCA.

      --

      "Information wants to be expensive" - Stewart Brand, the same guy who said "Information wants to be free"
    4. Re:DCMA, what's next? by nathanh · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Now if that modchip contains code copyrighted by MS (which they always do as far as I know)

      Nope. The first modchips contained code owned by Microsoft. There are new modchips which are Microsoft free. They are still illegal under the DMCA. Huzzah for America, the land of the free.

  5. Auto Makers by kUnGf00m45t3r · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Just wait, pretty soon automakers will start using the DMCA to keep you from repairing your car yourself. That way you have to take it to an "authorized repair center".

    1. Re:Auto Makers by pair-a-noyd · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I saw on TV a few weeks ago where a car shop somewhere installs MOD chips that turns kittens into tigers.

      The chips apparently modify the fuel injection system, pollution control, timing, etc.

      It used to be to hot rod a car you installed goodies like NOS injectors, turbo chargers, Holly four barrel, etc..
      Now you replace the factory chip with a "HOT" mod chip..

      I don't see the car companies invoking DMCA to stop that..
      What the hell is the difference?? mod chipping a car to run better vs. mod chipping the xbox to run better (replace M$ w/ Linux) ?????

      Screw them...

  6. Bans and Stuff by fm6 · · Score: 4, Interesting
    It amazes me that a book such as this could be banned, yet car service manuals can be sold in most bookstores.
    If GM or Ford had an automotive equivalent of the DMCA, they certainly could ban service manuals. The fact that they don't have oen and don't want one should be a lesson for media and software companies.

    American auto manufacturing started out as a small, boutique industry. Henry Ford changed all that by assuming (correctly, as it happened) that ordinary people would buy cars if he made it practical for them to own them. Part of this was inventing more efficient manufacturing techniques, so he could sell cars more cheaply. But he also specifically encouraged the aftermarket car parts industry, even going so far as to choosing his own manufacturing techniques so that they'd be easy to copy. Thus somebody with a broken Model T didn't have to send away to Michigan for parts. This relationship extends to this day.

  7. Nope! by Erwos · · Score: 3, Interesting

    "It amazes me that a book such as this could be banned, yet car service manuals can be sold in most bookstores."

    I'd argue this is more like a book about how to defeat car alarm systems. If it was "how to repair your X-Box", I don't think we'd see this controversy.

    -Erwos

    --
    Plausible conjecture should not be misrepresented as proof positive.
  8. Illegal Acts by Detritus · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I own several books that give step-by-step instructions on how to commit acts that are felonies under federal law. The authors and publishers have a first amendment right to publish this information, even if acting upon it would be a crime. Why should a book on hacking the xbox be any different?

    --
    Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
  9. The reason Bill's upset about this is by TerryAtWork · · Score: 2, Interesting

    that he makes his $ on the games not the box. He loses money on the box, and he's not going to lose $ so some hacker can build a Beowolf cluster of cheap Linux boxes.

    BUT he's going about it the wrong way. The RIGHT way to do this is make it a physical bitch to modify the box, not to get lawyers involved.

    --
    It's Christmas everyday with BitTorrent.
  10. I pose a question. by schappim · · Score: 2, Interesting

    If I were to buy a whole heap of xboxes and put linux on all of them without putting in a modchip, (using the raincoat hax) and then sold these as internet tv devices with keyboard and mouse, would it be considered illegal?

  11. uh by autopr0n · · Score: 5, Interesting

    None of it violates the DMCA. Books are not devices. They do not violate the DMCA. Ever.

    --
    autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
    1. Re:uh by pyrote · · Score: 2, Interesting

      actually I have a stack of papers with decss in barcode... does that count as a digital copy or a print copy?

      --
      THE WORLD IS GOING TO END!!!! eventually.
  12. Car service manuals don't tell everything by bagofbeans · · Score: 3, Interesting

    "It amazes me that a book such as this could be banned, yet car service manuals can be sold in most bookstores."

    Not really. The Haynes manual for my Chevy Malibu does not even admit there's a harness for the seatbelt alarm (and other alarms), so I can't disable it without trial and error.

  13. they'd have one if one company had a by knowledgepeacewi · · Score: 2, Interesting

    MONOPOLY

    There are no "good" multinational corporations.

    Its about the money and if Ford, or GM had a monopoly they'd do it. Lucky for us they make horrible cars compared to Toyota and Honda.

    Henry Ford primed the economic pump by paying his workers more than they deserved so that they would be able to afford his product. It was economic genius.
    But these are the days of the Microsoft monopoly.

  14. Info on Nintendo and Sony taking losses? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Do you have links to valid information confirming that Nintendo takes losses on GC sells, or Sony on PS2 sells? I have looked, but never found any. Can you let us take a glimpse into your crystal ball?

  15. Ford is Dead by twitter · · Score: 2, Interesting
    Henry Ford ... made it practical for them to own them. ... he also specifically encouraged the aftermarket car parts industry, even going so far as to choosing his own manufacturing techniques so that they'd be easy to copy. Thus somebody with a broken Model T didn't have to send away to Michigan for parts. This relationship extends to this day.

    Do you think for one instant this spirit survives? Detroit, at great costs, changes their body styles yearly and supports a far greater than needed diversity of models. They do this to make it impossilbe to keep a car running beyond it's "planned obsolescent" date. To get body pannels and parts, you go to a junk yard. Sure, some parts are interchangable and third parties can sell them, but your old car is going to be ugly fall appart around you.

    As for the DMCA, Detroit is slow but it won't be long before they follow the printing industry's lead on banning 3rd party sales on anything with a chip in it. It's already difficult, if not impossible, to get information on your car's computer. Ever seen a service manual that would help you make a real mod there? It makes me sick.

    --

    Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.

  16. Copyleft T-Shirts by jeti · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Please note that Copyleft is currently sued over
    their t-shirts with DeCSS source code on them.

    I think the code in this case does not have that
    "functional aspect".