Slashdot Mirror
Xbox Auto-Update Blocks Linux Usage
An anonymous reader writes "According to The Inquirer, Microsoft has used their Xbox Live Vole System to patch any Xboxes that access it....without asking their permission before installing the software. However, in this occurrence, the bug appears to be the 'dashboard bug' that allows Linux to be easily installed on an Xbox. Further, according to The Xbox Linux Project, users who do not have an Xbox Live account may find themselves being patched without permission as well. If a gamer tries to access any part of a game that uses Xbox Live, the console can 'phone home' and install the patches anyway. While patching bugs can be a nice touch to poor software, I don't know if I feel comfortable with ANYONE installing software on my hardware without asking permission first."
But then again, what the hell did you expect when it said "Microsoft" on the box?
Uhm...one big problem here. Microsoft isn't accessing your XBox. Your XBox is accessing Microsoft's servers.
No one should be shocked at this, it was predicted as soon as the bug was found and exploited. Anyone that cares, but who doesn't mod their box and flash its BIOS (or whatever) by the time they next let it connect to the Interweb is an idiot.
Available for PC in November, and will probably be better than the XBox version.
So sayeth Gamespot.
the bits are not owned, they are copyrighted.
copyright infringement is not theft, theft is a crime that in most countries is governed by completely different legislation.
'There is a Light that never goes out.'
Umm
Sony and Nintendo have consistently sold console systems as loss-leaders with the plan to recoup costs primarily from game licenses.
Not trying to stick up for MS, but they hardly *innovated* that particular tactic.
Try to remember that we are not talking about a general purpose computer, we are talking about a specific purpose, console system. If you don't like them, great, don't buy them. There are lots of games that are made for the PC (heck, I just broke down and bought my first console since the Atari 2600 'cause I didn't see the need).
A console is ENTIRELY about control.
The console manufacturer typically charged an exhorbitant fee for a dev kit.
They also charged premium prices for distribution.
For those charges, a game company would have access to a relatively captive audience (they already own the system, if they don't buy any games then its their loss), and a fixed set of hardware/software (so that they can specifically target the game
Not saying that all development houses take advantage of everything, and recently there has been a trend toward a more open approach on the Dev kit side, but it still is preaty much about control.
This space for rent. All reasonable inquiries will be entertained at proprietors discretion.
And the point of that complete dominance is a consistant, reliable platform on which to play games that you can almost absolutely be sure will work on that hardware without any configuration, driver updating, or service pack installation.
In other words, it's a feature, not a bug.
I don't know if I feel comfortable with ANYONE installing software on my hardware without asking permission first.
Sue Microsoft.
Seriously though, the solution here is to try to firewall off your x-box and do packet filtering. Block any "update" patches.
autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
"Maybe NOW it is, since Microsoft introduced the concept of loss-leading on the hardware...made up by software licensing."
You've got your facts a little skewed. I believe Sony was the first to sell its PS1 consoles at a loss, to gain marketshare over the mighty N back when the PS1 first came out. They made their money from the game licensees.
At least, I think that's how it all started with the consoles. I may be fuzzy on the details, but I'm 99% sure that MS wasn't the first to use this strategy.
-JC
With Tivo, they can update the software on the Tivo box whenever they want. In fact, I'm sure one of these days, I'll wake up and find my 30 second skip feature has disappeared.
Anyways, with more and more networked devices out there, I suspect this will become very common... its just too compelling from an operations point of view to be able to update the software automatically. Think about it - less versions out there to support, more advertising possibiliites, new features they want to sell to you (like Tivo's HMO), bug and security fixes, etc....
-kn
Also wrong, 32MB usb drives thumb drives can be used to transfer a KOTOR save with the Free (well you have to pay shipping) PSO Keyboard adaptor.
It seems all MS is doing is patching the exploit in the dash... Most Xbox modders knew this was going to happen and said this was going to be a cat-and-mouse game if you threw Live into the mix - they were right. What it boils down to basically is:
If you want Live, use a modchip with a switch or an older Xbox that supports multiple BIOS images on the TSOP, or just an unmodded Xbox.
If you don't care about Live, just flash your TSOP and be done with it.
xbox-scene.com has excellent tutorials on how to get the 007: Agent Under Fire and Mechassult hacks onto an unmodified Xbox using only a memory card, your Xbox joystick and a modified USB cable. The instructions for using these hacks to reflash the TSOP are very easy to follow and accurate for every Xbox version.
I've modded 5 Xboxes by flashing the TSOP so far and haven't had a single problem... If you don't care about Live, it's the easiest and cheapest way to go.
---
DRM is like antifreeze, to the MPAA/RIAA it's sweet, to the consumers it's poison.
Here's a simple command, while it doesn't fix DNS queries, it won't let any traffic go through to their server:
Just run, as root:
iptables -A OUTPUT -d 64.94.110.11 -j REJECT
if you do this on your linux-based router, all boxes behind the router will be blocked from their site as well.
PS: I don't know how this might interfere if you already have iptables rules set up
sig? uhh, umm, ok
Generally speaking (as laws are different in different countries).... Consumer protection law typically has the concepts of "fit for purpose" and the "reasonable person".
To be considered "fit for purpose" the good has to be fit for the general purpose for which it was sold as well as any specific additions covered by discussions etc between the purchaser and the seller.
On top of that is the concept of the "reasonable person".
As far as an XBox goes it's general purpose is to play XBox games (and work with other XBox hardware). The existence of the buffer underrun is clearly not required for that purpose.
You would find it very difficult to convince someone that a "reasonable person" would consider the buffer underrun as a feature of the product:
a) It is not advertised by the manufacturer.
b) In general discussion it is typically referred to as a bug (ie the "Dashboard bug") rather than as a feature of the product.
The case with your Apex is somewhat different. The functionality that disappeared was a real feature that a "reasonable person" purchasing the product would expect to (continue to) be there.
Boffoonery - downloadable Comedy Benefit for Bletchley Park
Man, do you have a low end computer, or what? Radeon 9700's got TV out, with an optional HDTV adaptor. SB Live (and newer) has dolby digital (optical) out, and most games since Unreal Tournament have 3d sound (DX and/or Dolby). If you really need the controller, you can go buy a used one, slap on a USB connector and play. The only real problem, like was said earlier, is the release date.
"The government of the United States is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion."
They're upgrading your video game console...although you do consent when you sign up for Live, if you actually read the Terms of Service.
They're doing the upgrade regardless of whether you are using Live, if you actually read the article.
Don't label something "offtopic" unless you know the topic well enough to tell what's on topic.
>The hardware is yes but the software isn't. It
>hasn't been your software ever. You may own the
>CD it's on but the bits burned on to it are
>owned by the creator of the content.
You seem to confuse "owning" with having the copyright". It is two very different things and one does not imply the other. Hence someone can own something without having the copyright on it. Someone can also hold a copyright without owning it. Of course, in some cases one can have someone owning something AND holding the copyright.
When you buy something in a store, you get to own it (that is the concept of transfering ownership and is regulated through sale laws or consumer sale laws and so on). Transfering ownership in this way does not mean copyright is transfered as well. It remains with whoever had it before.
So if you buy software, you indeed get to own that copy of it. You do not however get to have the copyright on it. SO yes, you own the bits on the CDs too (which are actually just physical properties of the disc).
>The EULA states it isn't yours.
Which EULA? ONe that was part of the sale agreement and agreed to before purchase? Never seen such a thing. If you want to regulate a purchase (for example making it a loan, or have some other restrictions), you have to agree to it before the purchase. Sale laws and more important consumer sale laws regulate this and will also in many cases tell things that are NOT allowed to regulate with a purchase.
I suppose you refer to some paper, window screen, manual or whatever that call itself EULA and tell something about the software you sold. However that has as little bearing and influence on the sale/purchase as the piece of paper I might have in my pocket stating (for example) that by selling something to me I actually get to own the whole store. It is not part of the sale and thus, can't regulate it.
>Now before the flames begin, I believe that what
>I buy should be mine to do whatever with. But
>due to whatever rules that govern software it
>just doesn't happen.
Rules? What "rules"? IN most countries the LAW regulate sales/purchases. Unless the laws says you never own software you buy, you do indeed own the copy of the software you bought. The copyright is still with the original maker of the software (and not with the shop for example or someone else) and copyright is of course regulated by the copyright laws. The law also regulate the procedure of selling something and how additional agreemenets regulating it is done. Having a EULA presented to you later that revoke the ownership of something you bought is NOT an acceptable such additional contract in most countries I would say.
>>PC controllers are trash. I have yet to find a gamepad that's half as good as a PS2 one
which is why I bought this.
It rocks. They have cheaper ones also.
Acid House saves Souls
There is another {again weirdy} connector a short distance along the cable, that might be for an extension lead or it might be a deliberate weak link as an anti-pull-off-shelf measure.
Halo was ALWAYS going to be a PC/Mac game. But once MS purchased them, they saw potential in releasing it on the xbox. Now remember, this is a company which is very perfectionistic. They didnt want to release a full blown multiplayer version until it was up to their standards, thus the delay.
If you are interested in finding out more facts (rather than PC and MS-bashing propaganda), GameSpy has lots of news and info on Halo.
Manipulate the moderator system! Mod someone as "overrated" today.
You agreed to the EULA by buying the thing; the EULA is on the outside of the box (on the side). You had a couple of seconds while they rang it up to read the EULA, and now you have to stick by it. :P
"Never, never suspect the dreams within the dreams of dreaming children." ~The Amazon Quartet