Slashdot Mirror
DVD-Jon Breaks iTunes Encryption For Linux Users
McGruff writes "The Register has a story regarding DVD-Jon's new hobby, iTunes DRM. According to the story DRMed iTunes AAC files can now be played under Linux via VidioLAN Client thanks to some handywork by Jon.
'"When you run the VideoLAN Client under Windows it will write the user key to a file. The user key is system independent and can thus be used by the GNU/Linux version of VLC," he explains.' Personally, this just means I will buy even more iTunes." (We mentioned in November Johansen's efforts to negate the iTunes restrictions on Windows.)
Does anybody else see something wrong with Apple having a program that only works on Windows and Macs? You would think they would be a little bit more understanding of those of us running "alternative" OSes.
Chaos will always win out over order because chaos is more organized
Seems like this crack can be patched.
I doubt Apple will call DVDJohn but I bet the RIAA will.
Get in trouble. Long, laborious litigation. What was solved? Nothing. Consumers don't have more rights. It's still a pain in the ass to decode DVDs, and now he's on a bunch of corporate sharks' bad sides.
Then, he decides to go and pull this shit AND be vocal about it. Kid, seriously, grow up. Yes, it's very nice that you're demonstrating your "freedom". How about learning some common sense with that, Jones? You just got out of major litigation, now you want to swim back into it? Even a guy who jaywalks knows to avoid the police immediately after getting fingered.
Let's see, which of the following choices would've had the best effect:
* Immediately releasing a hack just after litigation.
* Releasing it anonymously.
* Waiting until the temperature settled, then quietly sneaking this past Apple and opening a bunch of doors in the process.
I vote the last one.
You are not thinking on the same scale as me. This reverse-engineering of the iTMS' AAC copy-protection means more people will share the music they buy with relatives / people they know, at a small scale. I don't think this marks the "end of the music industry" in any way, it will probably have no impact on the market, apart from letting Linux users listen to music they'd buy from the iTunes Music Store, which means more potential customers.
Maybe we deserve this world ?
Have you perhaps heard of "free time"? Or "hobby", perhaps? Most people do not work 60h+ workweeks, you know; they prefer to have a life outside work as well.
Trust the Computer. The Computer is your friend.
This hack is, OTOH, useful for 'fair use' - for people who dual-boot Windows and Linux. As well as dedicated music pirates who would re-share the unlocked files as plain AAC.
Michel
Fedora Project Contribut
You know, ever since Apple has released OS X and their new sexy metallic machines (what's next? Gallium?), their legal department has been surreptitiously quiet. This development might make the "evil" side of Apple show itself again... It will be interesting to see if this development will affect their stance any on Quicktime for Linux...
Slashdot's first reaction to VMware
That would be the way for apple to go if they were in it to make everyone feel good. But actually, they are in it to make money. And as you may have noticed, a lot of linux users don't like to pay for stuff. This is smart for Linux users, not so good for people trying to make money off of Linux users.
And of course, it could never be enough. port itunes to linux? Where is the Ogg Vorbis support? Got Ogg? Why doesn't it work with *insert random peice of sourceforge developed software here*
I know, nobody wants to hear that they are the prima donnas of the IT world. But I've got Karma to burn.
At least Apple's version of DRM would go virtually unnoticed by casual listeners of music. iTunes DRM was designed to deter heavy pirates, but in all fairness, their DRM scheme is the best of the bunch. There are several ways to circumvent iTunes DRM, but at least DVD Jon's implementation just means it's less of a hassle for the said casual user.
That's because any DRM scheme, no matter how permissive, is the camel's nose under the tent for much more intrusive schemes. Love the username, BTW.
Call (206) 338-5780 COLLECT for information about a genuine BA, BS, MA, MS, MBA, or Ph.D.
Yeah damnit! He ruined it! I was really really happy paying the same price for 0s and 1s as I would for a product that I could hold in my hands, had pretty artwork and a case and better overall sound quality. It was sooooo cool that I could only play my 0s and 1s in 3 different places - it made me feel like I was part of an "elite music club" and was much better than CDs that *anyone* can borrow and enjoy - I mean after all, music shouldn't be enjoyed by everyone, just those with money to burn, right?
:(
Now what am I going to do?
Sunday you're Thinking Different, Monday you're a huge tool, paying too much and waiting to think like everyone else.
I'm not sure how DVD-Jon can remove that step.
iTunes runs on windows and Mac OS, so either way you are going to have to boot into either of those two to actually get the songs in the first place.
iTunes (or similar) for GNU/Linux is what I am really waiting for.
On one side of the coin, this is definately great news for everyone not running Windows or OS X who still want to listen to their DRM'd AAC files. Now, there is some portability to these files, and the ability to cue them up in VLC.
On the flipside, when some music industry execs look at this and wonder why they can't control their content, there are a number fingers going to be point at the OSS community because of it.
Where do we draw the line at control? The **AA industries wants to control their content, and we (I use "we" very loosely) want to have control over that which we've purchased. But who truly owns the bits? A series of 1s and 0s? Who's allowed to make the rules?
I know who I WANT to make the rules, me, of course. But I also know who legally gets to make the rules at this point. Them. I don't want the music industry to get pissed off and take my iTunes away. I've found a legal, beneficial means to aquire my music. I want MORE options, not less because of wary industry execs who don't want to have their content cracked.
And let's not even bring the DMCA into the picture here...
Can you ping me now? Gooood! | Manhappenin.Net - Things to do
He's trying to play media that he legally purchased on Linux. This is exactly the argument that he used in his DeCSS defense. Until Norway passes a law making that illegal, he's perfectly safe.
Not everyone likes to pirate music. Some people would love to buy a song on iTunes and be able to listen to it on Linux.
RaGe
We're all just noise on the wires..
Quick, get the files before Apple C&D's VideoLAN!!!! No rush. Thats what p2p is for !!
No, there needs to be a compromise. Apple doesn't give a rats ass about a secure trusted client, iTunes and iPods supported and still support mp3 way before iTunes and copy protection was around. What they do care about is being able to legally sell songs online. To get the labels on board they have to make an honest attempt at copy protection, which they did. They also have to try and balance consumer rights, which they also did.
Of course depending on your point of view it might not seem like it. The record companies probably feel that there should be no way to rip the secure content to MP3 or burn it to CD. Some consumers probably feel that only making 10 CD copies (or whatever it is) of a purchased playlist is a huge burden.
So it's a technical contest. Apple secures things, hackers unsecure things. Eventually if the RIAA companies see the light they'll realize that the money spent on securing things is really just being pissed away and things will change.
Chris Kuivenhoven is a thief, beware
The "original WAV"?
And just what - pray tell - would that be? You do realise that decimation to a 16bit 44.1Khz PCM file is merely a part of the mastering process? Most recordings these days start out an AWFUL lot bigger than that.
That was classic intercourse!
Even if the price is the exact same, being able to purchase by tune is still a major win for the consumer. Even my favorite artists have tunes that I don't particularly care for. They're not necessarily "just filler," or bad songs but they don't appeal to me. There are other artists that I'm not really a fan of but I like one or two songs. The bottom line is that this puts choice in the hands of the consumer, and consumer choice is a good thing.
"The legitimate powers of government extend only to such acts as are injurious to others." Thomas Jefferson.
He's trying to play media that he legally purchased on Linux.
Really? That was the DVD-case, yes. But iTMS is not available in Norway, at least not yet. Where did he purchase those tracks from then? EBay? Yes, but... oh, wait...
Somehow, I still smell a lawsuit around here...
“Wait for Hurd if you want something real” –Linus
I damn well would have purchases several dozen songs from Itunes if they would have played in Linux. Unfortunately they don't. And I DON'T download music because most of it is a copyright violation, and despite your narrow-minded prejudices I'm afraid you will find that I and many other Linux users are very honest and would gladly buy things legally if we could.
I can't understand why Apple doesn't port iTunes to Linux. If that where the case, I would use it more then I do now. Its a pain in the ass having to reboot just to do it.
until (succeed) try { again(); }
Maybe I'm behind the times. I thought iTunes was still a U.S.-only service?
So how is Jon trying to play media on Linux that he's legally purchased when it can't be purchased in Norway? I'm just wondering.
The claim is because Apple doesn't make money off of iTuness it won't hurt... but it will.
Steve Jobs clearly stated on more than one occasion that iTunes has done wonders for moving iPods (a big business, and growing).
iTunes got the Music industries backing because it was secure... if that trust is lost, after the contracts end, iTunes has no more content.
That means no more iTunes, and that lowers the sale of iPods.
All that can be good, can be used for evil.
Radiation can kill, and it can save lives. Without water we die. With to much, we drown.
iTunes is the same way.
You know you can choke to death on an Apple? If that NT computer that controls the Machines in the hospital goes down... you could die too.
It's all subject to success, and failure. Perhaps that's life.
My only beef is that DVDJohn is intentionally ruining the first digital success of legal Music, what could have been quite an industry. Apple already went to Windows... I would have bet, Linux was in the works. Apple needs the Open Source community, and knows that.
He is? The iTunes Music Store is available only in the United States, and I believe he's in Norway.
(Apple uses the credit card mailing address to ensure you are in the US, but don't confuse your ability to get a US credit card with Apple having a legal right to sell you that song if you really aren't a US resident.)
sorry, I didn't exactly read your entire post. I stopped at "dedicated music pirates" the saw the rest of that sentence later.
I think you should consider that there are MANY practical reasons why a legitimate owner (licensee?) of iTMS music might want to strip the DRM from their files.
I do sympathize, but I have to disagree with your logic.
It's a Slashdot axiom, but I'll repeat it here: If your business plan relies upon unbreakable encryption, it's a bad business plan.
That being said, I don't see how this is going to destroy iTunes. Yes, copyright violations are possible using these ideas. But I think you'll find that anyone who is using iTunes in the first place (rather than just nabbing whatever they want from P2P) is going to be the kind of person who wouldn't commit a copyright violation through iTunes, either.
Weaselmancer
Weaselmancer
rediculous.
Why do people insist on things like this... I would really like to find the person who could honestly tell me that they enjoy a 192+ kbps encoded (mp3pro, aac, wma) any less than the cd. Can anyone really hear any loss during regular use? People just like to _know_ that they are listening to a completely, totally, 100% original even though they would probably never know. And like the others who responded to this comment, what's the point when these files are generally being encoded directly from masters which yields _better_ results than what you want (a 100% copy of the cd)
Depends on how he actually did it.
If all he did was point his browser at itunes.com and buy the song using his own credit card, then the norwegian courts would not give a rat's ass about Apple really not wanting to sell it to him.
Same thing goes if he bought it while actually beeing in USA (vacation or something).
Have you spent any time with Apple products recently? Some of them are really very good! That's where this 'cool' thing is coming from.
Unlike Microsoft, an illegal monopoly, Apple has pressure on it to produce good products. So do most companies, but they suck at it.
The iPod is not an underdog product, it's a great product. It's expensive as hell, but it's so great that people will buy it anyway. That's cool.
"Why would you want to re-encode an AAC to an MP3?"
So I can put it on my mp3 player that doesn't and never will know how to decode AAC. As of right now, I have to burn the music to cd, then rip it to mp3. It would be nice to skip a step.
You might hear a single 100% silent frame between songs as a "click" (maybe, if you listen carefully) but in reality there would never be a 100% silent frame inserted, and most decoders are pretty good at covering up inter-frame glitches.
Ah. This explains two aspects of ipods that I've found odd up til now: the fact that only itunes can be used to move files to them, and the fact that files can't easily be moved from ipods back to main computers.
The whole concept behind iTunes encryption is that once a machine is authorized, it can play songs without any outside intervention. Meaning that it has everything it needs to decrypt the songs right there on that machine. Meaning that as long as this is true, it can be cracked again.
Yup. I think DRM is fundamentally harder than encryption between two peers because DRM is trying to prevent the recipient of data from using that data in ways other than intended, whereas two-peer encryption is focused on trying to prevent outsiders from gaining access to the data at all. DRM forces the vendor to include the decryption keys SOMEWHERE.
- First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then ???, then profit.
The fact still remains, those 1000 lines of code represent his (and others) thoughts and ideas and be they English or C they are free speech. Thats probbaly why there are no comments - the code is the comment.
This time he has used GPL v2 license. DeCSS was NOT originally for Linux but was for Windows and was not GPL'd. Thus from free speech point of view DeCSS was tainted. This time he has at least used the correct license if he expects the code to stay free.
By appreciation, we make excellence in others our own property. - Voltaire
One would think that he would have learned about anonymity by now - that maybe it ISN'T such a good idea to plaster your name all over the place when you start breaking laws (yes, this is technically against the law, at least in the US, at least right now)...
I'm not sure I'd want Apple coming after me when I break their latest big hit...
dude, it's only a thousand lines. it's a one-shot program. he had no intention of going back and adding features for the next version, or improving on it in any way - it's for one single purpose! no need for comments here, move along now.
He is clearly interested in Fair Use. The folks doing the ruining are the MPAA.
They want to destroy Fair Use. Apple struck a deal to get things moving. If Apple suffers over this, it won't be because of Jon, it will be because of the MPAA.
Personally, I applaud the guy. He is doing the right thing at the right time. This whole action is going to get a lot of people thinking. I believe in Fair Use, as do a lot of people --even if they do not know what it is legally. Morally they do and that is what counts in the end. If enough people continue to express their counter view, the law *will* change.
Remember, we all get older. Our chance at the law will come. Should we all just lay down and forget things until that time?
No, because we should not have to --for me that is reason enough.
Blogging because I can...
Getting your Windows Product ID blacklisted is probably enough of a hassle. Clearly Apple has this information as well - otherwise how do they lock the files you purchase in the first place?
And anyway, pirates would rather share the non-protected files. Once you could unlock the AAC stream for playback it should not be hard to then save it to a file, unencrypted.
Michel
Fedora Project Contribut
I frown upon this sort of piracy
It's not piracy until you sell/give the re-encoded file away to somebody else. Until then it's fair-use (hint: think of devices that play Mp3 but not AAC).