Slashdot Mirror
FairPlay v2 Reversed, Playfair Back Online
An anonymous reader writes "Two weeks ago Apple released iTunes 4.5. The minor changes Apple made to their Music Sharing Protocol (daap) were reverse engineered after just one day. According to a post in the Doom9 forums FairPlay version 2 has also been reverse engineered. playfair has
already been patched with the new code and is back online with FSF India providing legal support. How will Apple respond?"
I do not want to get flamed, but honestly, when I read this stuff I wonder how everyone can get so pissed off when someone breaks the GPL yet be so supportive of someone doing this kind of work?
For all of the lofty talk in the community, is it at it's root support for whatever it takes to get "what I want, free"?
I just would like to know the difference between these things which to me seem similar.
Looking for a better understanding.
a man, a plan, a canal, panama
>>How will Apple respond?
.m4p files from the iTunes store.
>With FairPlay v3.
Of course! Apple has to show the RIAA and record labels that they're trying to prevent "unauthorized decryption" of the
There's really nothing else that Apple can do. If they ignore PlayFair, the RIAA will surly pull the plug on iTunes.
I'm waiting for Microsoft to start their MSN music store. I have a feeling MS will tell the RIAA what they can do with their wishes and desires. For one, MS will want to keep as much money to themselves as possible. They'll also want the RIAA to quick overreacting every time a weakness in DRM is exploited.
I would much prefer WMA and WMV to be hacked! I find that much worse than Apples iTunes!
I'd say they are better, its much harder to reverse engineer than to engineer.
I don't think its a matter for Apple to decide. If the music labels that allow Apple to sell the music keep telling them to change the DRM, Apple has little choice. Without a product to sell, iTMS is pointless.
This is probably the excuse the music industry is waiting for to force Apple to raise their rates in the future. It is the old "Gotta make up for revenue lost to piracy" excuse. You have to admit, that while this does provide an avenue for fair use, a large percentage of its use is going to be for piracy.
Will I use the new Hymn/Playfair program? Oh, probably - my .Mac account runs out and I'm not going to renew, and it's how I bought my iTunes songs in the past.
So, now I'm kind of boned (maybe - probably not, but maybe) in the future. Yes, I can "rip to audio-CD-and-then-to-MP3", but Hymn will make it all a "one stop shopping trip" for my fairly large iTunes store collection (hey, they had a special on classical music and BB King - give me a break).
Apple really doesn't have much to worry about, since people have to buy the music first before they can remove the Fairplay protections. And even if a bunch of butt-munches start "sharing" their music with others, that means more AAC files out there, which means a better chance we'll see more MP3 players that include AAC support in the future.
So while Apple doesn't have to worry about Fairplay, the fact is that the folks they get their music from - IE, the RIAA and even independant musicians - might like to hear that Apple's not letting just anybody give away their music without paying for it. Apple might not care, but since the place where they get music does, Apple's obligated to at least "fight the good fight" to show "due process" or some such.
Yeah, I'll use it, I know Apple will work to shut it down, but it should all be good in the long run.
52 Weeks, 52 Religions with John Hummel
I don't think so. Apple did counter the reverse-engineering with a second version, but at this point I think they realize that it is not cost effective to spend money on a problem that cannot be fixed. It takes Apple too much time and money to develop a new system. They will have to choose to 1. ignore it 2. change their philosophy
Don't forget that it continues to make the community look bad. "See, we made this format so that people could legally download music for a nominal fee and they just keep breaking it so that they can pirate the tunes."
Don't bother with DRM, RIAA sponsored music, and certainly don't bother with breaking it. Just ignore it and support free music.
DRM, copy protection.. it's all the same stuff, and it's never worked. I don't know what makes people think it can work now, when it has failed for the last 25 years.
The only successful DRM has been to have a completely proprietary platform like Apple or SGI. You also get the side bonus of locking your customers into only buying your proprietary hardware upgrades.
I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
Please don't be so naive, at least in public.
Apple is not fighting this because they are evil, they are doing it becasue if they don't, record labels will be less interested in working with the iTunes Music Store.
If you must blame someone, blame the RIAA. I agree that it's sad that Apple is playing along with the bastards, but if they aren't seen as vigorously defending the "right" of the labels to make egregious profits, they could stand to lose a critical revenue stream.
Bander
What we need more of is science!
Plus they seem to be the best of show in reverse engineering, which would give Apple an insight on how they are doing it and what they could do to prevent it, or at least make it harder to do.
As a side note, why can't Apple make it easy for their own client to download newer versions of the whole app, or at least the protocol code, automatically from the client? Downloading and updating seems so archaic nowaways. Upgrading directly from the client would be convienient and allows them to update their stuff with a lot of reliability amongst their userbase.
Th
If they really wanted to be innovative, they would give the project their blessing.
How is that innovative?
Playfair is the equivalent of a Windows OS keygen. It might be an interesting academic exercise, but no more so than picking a lock or cracking encryption.
iTMS is actually more deserving of the title "innovative." And even that's not by very much. "Good business" is a better label.
I think it should be noted that: The software is now called HYMN for Hear Your Music aNywhere. The software has now made it so that while the DRM is stripped it KEEPS the AppleID inside of the song so that the original song can be traced back to its original owner if it were to show up on a p2p network. I think this is totally important and a GREAT stance for HYMN to take. While it allows fairuse of the songs to let us play them on Linux, 3rd party players, and Xbox Media Center, it still keeps copyright protection in mind. I'm really impressed with the developers for doing this.
Well, there are several opinions to that, so here's mine:
Fry this guy! Apple was the first to market with an online music store and is currently market leader. The Apple DRM system is probably the best out there when it comes to quality (AAC, much better than those crappy 128/192 KBps MP3s) and restrictions: Basically you can use the files on every computer in your household and iPod.
If you really want to hack a DRM system: Windows Media 9 is waiting for you and it will be the HD-DVD scheme both in coding and as DRM. Remember: If you break it now, make it to the press, the DVD Forum will not like using WM9. Clips are available here
What will Apple's reaction be? Well, the iPod has a lot of processing power (ARM core? Does anyone know the exact specs?) and it will survive the next generations of DRM change.
That may be one of the reasons, but then there's also the fact that their DRM only works with iPods. The whole idea behind the music store is just to sell more iPods. If there was no DRM, people could use their music on non-iPod players that support AAC, but as it is they're locked into buying iPods forever unless they want to re-purchase all their music.
Don't forget that it continues to make the community look bad. "See, we made this format so that people could legally download music for a nominal fee and they just keep breaking it so that they can pirate the tunes."
See, but that's stupid. People can already download music for free without playfair.
The only compelling reason for the existence of playfair is so that you can use the music you've legally purchased in whatever format you want. (Maybe you want to buy an Ipaq instead of an ipod for example).
THIS ISN"T ABOUT PIRACY IT'S ABOUT CONTROL.
It's like a "broadcast flag" for music. By claiming it's a pircacy issue, you only HELP the RIAA and hurt those who understand the big picture.
Life is too short to proofread.
Bull! The music is owned by the public but the artists or whoever shafts them are granted by us a (supposedly) time limited monopoly on that work during which they can make money. This is incentive for people to actually create things.
Disney, et al. have perverted this system so that an artists grand-children can milk money from their works. They have also worked hard to mislead people about copyright. In your case they have succeeded.
If you want free music, buy from artists who choose to give their music out freely. Respect the property rights of others.
No argument.
There are two kinds of people: 1) those that need closure
Breaking the DRM doesn't allow people to pirate the music. It's CD's and MP3's that make up the bulk of pirating. DRM or no, legitimately purchased AAC files don't make up any substantial portion of pirating anyways.
I would guess that approximately ZERO pirates have been twarted by DRM and LOTS of legitimate users have been annoyed by the restrictions.
Why are they (Apple|RIAA) so intent on DRM anyways?
Cheers.
That "buck" arleady gives you music that you can play at home, in the car and while jogging, by using the iPod. You remember it, that thing that Apple markets as "the" cool thing to have.
yes, non-DRMed MP3s serve them extremely well by providing the pirates with perfectly ripped tunes that they know not to be purposely screwed over by the RIAA. AFter all it's not like you can't just give that MP3 to all your friends without having them need to pay for the artist's work( and a large "packaging" fee to the Label)
Yes, the community doesn't look bad for constantly hacking products to rip them off and make things freely available that shouldn't be after all, we do live in a communist society, everything should be free and doled out equally to all. Maybe we should have parades for the authors, after all they are heroes for stealing something merely because they couldn't have it.
yes, an iPod is an investment in a service since after all, it only plays iTMS music, it can't play a multitude of other non DRMed formats.
Yes, we should btite you since after all we shouldn't get in the way of your pirating things, its not like its illegal or anything.
-"I'm one of those Mac people that will break a bottle on the bar and hold it to your throat for bad-mouthing my system"
Fair use does not gurantee you to the right to a perfect copy.
Jesus was a compassionate social conservative who called individuals to sin no more.
Everyone here saying "but it only removes the copy protection, you still had to buy it" Same is true for CDs. Someone had to buy it somehwere. Didn't stop them from sharing them all over God's green earth. Expect the same with AAC files if this continues
I doubt Apple is seriously concerned about PlayFair. The purpose of a lock really is to keep honest people honest. It's just a minor inconvenience for someone determined to get at the contents. Apple just wants to make it trivial+1 effort to keep most people from breaking it because it's too much of a chore. That's why they let you burn it to a CD and re-import as MP3 or whatever, but not convert directly to MP3--to make it too much of a hassle for most users to massively violate the agreement.
Illegal fair use?
Fair use includes making a backup copy. I don't believe making a backup includes downloading one from the Internet (but that is open to interpretation).
Illegal copy I make for my wife?
Doesn't fall into the downloading category.
Illegal copy of music I already bought so I can take it in my car without worrying about car thieves stealing my only copy?
Illegal copy on my hard drive so when the less than immortal physical CD craps out I don't have to pay for a new copy at full price?
Again, doesn't fall into the downloading category.
Illegal monopoly on region codes (violates WTO)?
I don't see how this has anything to do w/this topic. We are talking about music not region coded DVDs/games.
Illegal price fixing (RIAA)?
They were found guilty and supposedly paid the price they deserved. The open debate about the severity of the fine is irrelevant.
I'm going to take this opportunity to show anything Apple does is rated absolutely great on Slashdot but anything similar Microsoft does is evil.
The Slashdot article about "Janus", found here, contains a similar discussion about DRM, but with a focus on Microsoft (since "Janus" is Microsoft technology).
There is a post very similar to the parent of my reply, stating that Microsoft is not the one pushing for DRM, it is the media giants (RIAA, MPAA). Of course, since it was defending Microsoft's DRM, it was not moderated very high. But the parent to my reply is rated +5 and says almost the same thing (but is defending Apple).
And there was a lot of Microsoft bashing regarding the proposed DRM, moderated very highly of course, which can be found here, here, and here. But if you bash Apple on Slashdot for their DRM, you will be moderated -1 in a few seconds.
I know this will get moderated straight to -1, but I am not attempting to start a flame war, I would actually like to start a discussion and have someone explain to me exactly why Apple DRM is wonderful but Microsoft DRM is wrong. Keep in mind that I am not trying to defend Microsoft's DRM, my position is that BOTH DRMs are bad. Anyway, my real question is, what makes Apple so perfect and Microsoft so wrong?
Oh is that all you have to do? How convenient.
Remind me again how Apple (or anybody) is forcing you to buy music with DRM included? I seem to have missed that part.
--
"Open source is good." - Steve Jobs
"Open source is evil." - Microsoft
Just raise the taxes on crack.
Right now, under the laws of the United States, we have the right to make music compilations and give them to friends and family. There are no limits to how many times we can do this or how many people we give them to. DRM takes away that right away.
If you feel like turning over your rights to corporate America, then so be it. Fortunately, not everyone shares your view.
If someone says he and his monkey have nothing to hide, they almost certainly do.
You're wrong. These are your choices:
1. Buy music with DRM.
2. Don't.
And that's ignoring your third choice, which is to keep doing whatever you were doing (legally!) before the iTMS came about. Which includes, for example, buying a CD and ripping it yourself. All Apple's done here is give you another way to purchase your music legally, should you so choose; no one's FORCING you to use it.