Slashdot Mirror


Johansen Cracks AirPort Express Encryption

womby writes "DVD Jon has just announced that he cracked the encryption in Apple's AirPort Express. 'I've released JustePort, a tool which lets you stream MPEG4 Apple Lossless files to your AirPort Express. The stream is encrypted with AES and the AES key is encrypted with RSA.' No real details of the process employed in cracking the unit but newsworthy none the less."

116 of 459 comments (clear)

  1. Lawyers, start your engines. by flamingnight · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I wonder if Apple Legal will have a DMCA fit about this. And how good their case would be.

    1. Re:Lawyers, start your engines. by garcia · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Of course they will, I don't even know why you bothered to mention it. The real question is will it fit under the provisions allowing for reverse engineering or will it fall under the category of malicious code breaking?

      We all know what it should fall under. What category Apple's lawyers make it fall under is a different story.

    2. Re:Lawyers, start your engines. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      why would they ?, Jon is from Norway where US laws and ideals do not apply

      welcome to the rest of the world, where there is more of them than you

    3. Re:Lawyers, start your engines. by chromaphobic · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Or, they'll just use their usual methodology and release a Software Update with some non-descript "bug-fixes" that happens to also break JustePort. :-)

    4. Re:Lawyers, start your engines. by BobTheLawyer · · Score: 2, Informative

      Their case might be good, but it would also be irrelevant - as the chap concerned (and presumably his internet server) aren't in the US.

      (Extradition for a DMCA offence is pretty much out of the question.)

    5. Re:Lawyers, start your engines. by dasmegabyte · · Score: 3, Funny

      You forgot parent 4:

      "Sigh. Everybody so far has said X, Y and Z. Everybody always says X, Y and Z. I'm so sick of it. Moderators, I hate you and your children."

      --
      Hey freaks: now you're ju
  2. huh, sounds solid... by kippy · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Well it sounds like Apple did the right thing by using AES and RSA which are both industry standard and not some crazy "applecrypt" or something. Must be a really weak key or poor implementation or the protocol.

    1. Re:huh, sounds solid... by interiot · · Score: 5, Insightful

      What's NOT solid is the whole concept of selling products which contain the encrypt and decrypt keys to customers, and thinking that they're never going to be able to recover those keys from the product you just put in their hands.

    2. Re:huh, sounds solid... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      thinking that they're never going to be able to recover those keys from the product you just put in their hand

      im not sure but when someone buys something its theirs, all of it
      whats more the question is why is Apple encrypting in the first place and why cant i disable it ?

    3. Re:huh, sounds solid... by k98sven · · Score: 4, Insightful

      whats more the question is why is Apple encrypting in the first place and why cant i disable it ?

      Because Apple needs to stay friendly with the music industry, and that means the RIAA. They'd probably wouldn't mind skipping encryption altogether and saving a buck, but I doubt very many labels would support that scheme.

    4. Re:huh, sounds solid... by pedestrian+crossing · · Score: 2, Funny

      Geez, I had heard that emacs was the be-all do-all, but I didn't know you could listen to music over it! Damn, I'll be switching from vi right away!!

      --
      A house divided against itself cannot stand.
    5. Re:huh, sounds solid... by Stackster · · Score: 3, Insightful

      That would also mean that Apple really wouldn't care too much about someone breaking the encryption, although RIAA might force them to.

      I just ordered an Airport Express, just to stream audio from my laptop (sucky speakers, can't stand a cable). If I can stream from other sources, great. Even better would be to have other units (any computer) act as "iTunes speakers".

      --

      There are 010 kinds of people. Those who understand octal, those who don't, and 06 other kinds of morons.
    6. Re:huh, sounds solid... by squiggleslash · · Score: 2, Informative

      Which Mac doesn't have speakers in it? I've used a variety of Macs, three different models of PowerMac, and a Titanium PowerBook included, and all of them had speakers.

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    7. Re:huh, sounds solid... by byolinux · · Score: 2, Informative

      No speakers? Apart from the iMac, the eMac, and all their laptops, right? ;)

    8. Re:huh, sounds solid... by Decius6i5 · · Score: 2, Insightful
      They'd probably wouldn't mind skipping encryption altogether and saving a buck, but I doubt very many labels would support that scheme.
      Um, no, the encryption in this context doesn't just protect the music industry. It also prevents competitors from interoperating with apple's products. Apple likes it that way.
    9. Re:huh, sounds solid... by JohnsonWax · · Score: 3, Funny

      You could come visit my Xserve. But yeah, that's pretty much the list.

  3. Great News by Rura+Penthe · · Score: 5, Interesting

    This is great news. I want any application I own on any platform (OS X/Windows/Linux/Zeta!) to be capable of streaming to an Airport Express. I can't imagine that this would really upset Apple since you're still buying their hardware. It just lets you use the hardware with more applications. If iTunes is still the best and most elegant way, people will use that.

    Of course...Apple isn't always logical like that, and there may be some precedent set that would injure them in court some time later.

    1. Re:Great News by foidulus · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Well, a potential abuse of this system could be wardriving with cannibal corpse. If crackers can figure out how to encrypt the songs, they can war drive around till they find an AE and play, "Entrails Ripped From a Virgin's Cunt" instead of the Seasame Street sings the family wanted to play. There are valid reasons to having this encrypted.
      Also, the RIAA probably put some pressure on Apple to encrypt the songs. While I don't like piracy, the thought of someone driving around so they can download music that other people they don't know are listening to is very bizzare.

    2. Re:Great News by Rude+Turnip · · Score: 5, Interesting

      You can use an Airport Express and never buy anything from iTMS or purchase an iPod...just use your own MP3 collection. All three hardware products depend upon iTunes, but neither hardware item requires the other to use.

      To be honest, Apple's products become much more useful (and more desirable to purchase) when people come out with neat hacks like this. The only reason I spend big bucks in their music store is because the DRM has been broken through the Hymn project.

    3. Re:Great News by garcia · · Score: 4, Insightful

      To be honest, Apple's products become much more useful (and more desirable to purchase) when people come out with neat hacks like this.

      The only thing that makes it more attractive is that Apple finds a way to close the hole exposed by John's (or his friends') hack and the RIAA continues to let Apple distribute their wares for a reduced price.

      Once Apple cannot guarantee that the music is protected from "theft" then the RIAA will pull the plug on our "cheap" downloading.

    4. Re:Great News by Kristoph · · Score: 5, Informative

      The hack in question does not permit you to stream to the AE unless you have access to the network on which the AE resides. If you did gain access to that network in some way you could still engage in the "abuse" you mention through iTunes without this hack.

      The point of the hack is to permit you to stream music from programs other than iTunes to an AE you have access to and not to hijack AE's.

      ]{

    5. Re:Great News by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Then we just go back to "free" downloading.

    6. Re:Great News by MacGod · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The only concern I would have if I were in Apple's legal department, would be that if something like the INDUCE act passes, making it illegal to enable people to commit copyright infringement, then they might be liable, since now you are streaming perfect, digital music to all your neighbours.

      --
      "Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistent one " -Albert Einstein
    7. Re:Great News by lysander · · Score: 3, Informative
      I can't reach the website, but presumably this only works if you have access to the wireless network, so you'd have to break WPA/WEP as well (or find a sucker with an open network).
      It's possible to password protect the audio aspect of the airport express separate from WPA/WEP. You can even leave the access point entirely open and still password protect access to the audio. The article's still unavailable, so it's unclear what exactly Jon cracked.
      --
      GET YOUR WEAPONS READY! --DR.LIGHT
    8. Re:Great News by Bingo+Foo · · Score: 2, Funny
      (notice the difference in my *free* and your "free")

      Free as in "asterisk sandwich."

      --
      taken! (by Davidleeroth) Thanks Bingo Foo!
    9. Re:Great News by sammy+baby · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Of course...Apple isn't always logical like that, and there may be some precedent set that would injure them in court some time later.

      In fact, Apple recently suggested they may be pursuing legal action against Real for making the iPod compatible with songs from Real's store. You're still buying an iPod, but Apple is still bent out of shape about it.

      Of course, the profit motivation isn't as clear-cut here, but I wouldn't put it past Apple to throw a major hissy here.
    10. Re:Great News by raytracer · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Once Apple cannot guarantee that the music is protected from "theft" then the RIAA will pull the plug on our "cheap" downloading.

      This is absurd. Apple can't make any such guarantee, since it is obviously false. Pretending otherwise is just silly. If copy protection worked, we would not need laws to make breaking it illegal.

      But beyond that, this hack has nothing to do with copy protection. Using this hack you can only encode streams for playback on the Airport Express, not decrypt them. It doesn't give you any power to remove copy protection from music which has been encrypted. It would seem that any DMCA challenge to its legality would be expensive to fight, but ultimately doomed.

    11. Re:Great News by BobTheLawyer · · Score: 3, Funny

      security through unavailability?

    12. Re:Great News by An+ominous+Cow+art · · Score: 3, Funny

      I used to enjoy sadonecrobestiality, until I realized I was just beating a dead horse.

  4. Why oh why? by CountBrass · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Well I'm still waiting for my dealer to get some in stock so I can buy a couple (I have a single storey home that wanders, uhm, well you know what I mean).

    Anyway, back on topic, I never really understood why Apple felt the need to encrypt it in the first place. I mean, what next, B&O encrypting the output to speakers? Sony insisting their systems will only work with encrypted mains voltage that you certify has not been used to power any unauthorised (by the RIAA and MPAA) devices?

    --
    Bad analogies are like waxing a monkey with a rainbow.
    1. Re:Why oh why? by drinkypoo · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I mean, what next, B&O encrypting the output to speakers?

      IIRC, Creative has considered doing just that. Creative had considered opening an online music store which was to be called MuVo - that name sound familiar? It would initially sell CDs ala CDNOW (the site was pretty similar, really, with some significant upgrades from that feature set of course) and then later move to digital downloads.

      Naturally, Creative being what they are - a bunch of right bastards, if you want a driver or utility file especially - they were concerned about DRM. From what I understand, one idea that was seriously kicked around was a hardware device, probably USB speakers, being required to listen to the music. It is likely that the device would have had analog audio output, so you could put the music on a tape or something. It's the digital hole that labels want to close, they know they can't do anything about analog copying.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    2. Re:Why oh why? by drinkypoo · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Try reading my comment again, more slowly. The analog hole is not closable. It quite simply cannot be done. For instance you could take an encrypted digital speaker set, and attenuate the signal going to the speakers down to a 0-1.5V P-P signal, aka "Line Level".

      The digital hole is where you make a digital copy without degradation. The former motivation (besides ethics) for consumers to purchase commercial copies of media was quality. Now, with the ability to make a perfect digital copy, that motivation has gone away. Now it basically comes down to convenience and ethics. It's hard to feel too bad about taking some money away from a record label, and it's awfully convenient to just download music without paying for it. Hence the reason the record labels are pissing their corduroys.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    3. Re:Why oh why? by addaon · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Yep, that's the analog hole all right. It's just not what was being discussed.

      --

      I've had this sig for three days.
    4. Re:Why oh why? by ideonode · · Score: 4, Funny

      they can't do anything about analog copying

      Couldn't they encrypt the analog sound as it leaves the speakers, and give the user a DRM-enabled BabelFish?

  5. Does anyone know Jon's doctor? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    I want to know if he really does have testicles made of brass.

    1. Re:Does anyone know Jon's doctor? by ThatsNotFunny · · Score: 2, Funny

      Not only are they made of brass, but he's got five of them.

      --
      "Was it a millionaire who said 'Imagine No Posessions?'" -- Elvis Costello
    2. Re:Does anyone know Jon's doctor? by WolfWithoutAClause · · Score: 2, Funny

      Unlikely at the moment, but he'll probably need replacements after Apple's lawyers are through with him.

      --

      -WolfWithoutAClause

      "Gravity is only a theory, not a fact!"
    3. Re:Does anyone know Jon's doctor? by Tackhead · · Score: 4, Funny
      > > I want to know if he really does have testicles made of brass.
      >
      > Not only are they made of brass, but he's got five of them.

      I want to meet Jon's tailor. I hear he makes pants that fit like a glove.

    4. Re:Does anyone know Jon's doctor? by Xibby · · Score: 2, Informative

      Balls on a Brass Monkey have nothing to do with testicles.

      ---
      Origins of the saying "Cold enough to freeze the balls off a brass monkey!"

      In the heyday of sailing ships, all war ships and many freighters carried iron cannons. Those cannons fired round iron cannon balls. It was necessary to keep a good supply near the cannon, but prevent them from rolling about the deck. The best storage method devised was a square based pyramid with one ball on top, resting on four resting on nine which rested on sixteen.

      Thus, a supply of thirty cannon balls could be stacked in a small area right next to the cannon. There was only one problem - how to prevent the bottom layer from sliding/rolling from under the others? The solution was a metal plate called a "Monkey," with sixteen round indentations. If this plate was made of iron, the iron balls would quickly rust to it. The solution to the rusting problem was to make "Brass Monkeys."

      Few landlubbers realize that brass contracts much more and much faster than iron when chilled. Consequently, when the temperature dropped too far, the brass indentations would shrink so much that the cannon balls would roll right off the monkey. Thus, it was quite literally, "Cold enough to freeze the balls off a brass monkey!"

      --
      I'm going to go back in my box and will think within the limits of my box: MS Sucks Linux Good I read too much Slashdot.
    5. Re:Does anyone know Jon's doctor? by jandrese · · Score: 3, Informative

      Nice try, but Bzzzzt! Wrong answer. That expression was probably just as vulgar as it sounds.

      --

      I read the internet for the articles.
  6. Re:What? by Carewolf · · Score: 3, Interesting

    He is just a front figure of a large international cracking group. He has already been to court once, and is protected by a largely fair norwegian legal-system, so each time the group have something controversial (whenever they have something) they have him release it.

  7. This should be pretty cool by sith · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Since all he got was the public key, you can't actually decrypt streams that are being sent. What it means is that programs can now stream music to the AEx. This should be really cool, especially once something like AudioHiJack or Wiretap comes along that lets you redirect all your system audio to it. I'd love to be able to stream non-iTunes audio formats that way (real player radio stations and whatnot). Anyways, can't see how this hurts apple - more people have incentive to use the AEx, Apple doesn't have to support their use of it that way, and the protected music is still protected. Hizzah?

    1. Re:This should be pretty cool by sacrilicious · · Score: 2, Insightful
      can't see how this hurts apple - more people have incentive to use the AEx, Apple doesn't have to support their use of it that way, and the protected music is still protected. Hizzah?

      I'm glad this has been cracked and fully support it, but if the question is "why would Apple be opposed" then I'd point out the similarity of the relationships between iTunes/AirportExpress and InternetExplorer/IIS. Why would Microsoft oppose Apache or Mozilla? Because their existence takes away Microsoft's ownership of the end-to-end web browsing experience, thereby depriving them of the ability to lock in people and direct their experience to the greatest benefit of the corporation. Ditto Apple; this crack means they no longer own the end-to-end experience from iTunes to AirportExpress.

      --
      - First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then ???, then profit.
    2. Re:This should be pretty cool by RadioheadKid · · Score: 4, Informative

      RSA encrypted AES key

      You answered your own question. RSA here means the RSA Public Key Cryptography Standard The AES key (which is a symmetrical cipher key) was encrypted using RSA PKCS.

      --
      "Karma can only be portioned out by the cosmos." -Homer Simpson
  8. Re:Stupid stupid stupid by garcia · · Score: 4, Insightful

    He just doesn't give a shit for petty politics (DMCA crap).

    Of course he doesn't care about the DMCA. He lives in another country.

  9. WTF? by Philosinfinity · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Maybe I missed something, and I haven't been able to RTFA for obvious reasons. But doesn't the Airport Express take any stream sent to it from iTunes 4.6 or greater? What I am getting at is, on my iBook, I should be able to stream any file that plays from iTunes to the Airport Express. So what did I miss? Is this the ability to do that from other programs on other platforms? If so, why does the poster pick out the ability to transfer Apple Lossless files?

    1. Re:WTF? by PsychoSpunk · · Score: 5, Interesting

      This is a proverbial "last mile" problem: How do I get any sound to the Airport Express? The known elements are that the Airport Express plays Apple Lossless streamed from the client computer running iTunes. So the solution to the "last mile" is to figure out how to stream any Apple Lossless file to the Airport Express and not rely on a specific program. The conversion to Apple Lossless is left as an exercise for the reader, as they say.

      --
      ALL HAIL BRAK!!!
    2. Re:WTF? by xconslash · · Score: 2, Informative

      iTunes 4.6 converts the streams to Appple Lossless first, the AEx only accepts Apple Lossless.

      --


      .sig error: carrier signal lost.
    3. Re:WTF? by IntergalacticWalrus · · Score: 3, Informative

      > But doesn't the Airport Express take any stream sent to it from iTunes 4.6 or greater?

      Not really, iTunes always converts streams to Apple Lossless format prior to sending it to an AE (which is most likely the only format the AE understands, obviously).

      > So what did I miss? Is this the ability to do that from other programs on other platforms?

      Yes, but of course this is going to be the dvdcss case all over again, where the industry will accuse Jon of having made this purely for pirating purposes.

    4. Re:WTF? by the+hopthrisC · · Score: 3, Informative

      Is this the ability to do that from other programs on other platforms?

      Exactly.

      If so, why does the poster pick out the ability to transfer Apple Lossless files?

      He hasnt picked it out, it is the only option! Airport Express understands Apple Losless only. Every other format is recoded by iTunes before it is streamed.

    5. Re:WTF? by bocee · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Hi, you're absolutely right. This has nothing to do with pirating/DRM at all. How airtunes works is that iTunes decrypts the AAC file (if necessary) to WAV, then compresses it to apple lossless, then encrypts it again, then sends it off to the airport express. So, as you can see here, hijacking the airtunes broadcast would give you exactly the same results as burning your DRM'ed AAC files to a CD and then ripping them to apple lossless.

      However, this program from Jon doesn't even let you do this. It only lets you *encrypt* files so you can send them to the airport express to be played. (He has given us the public key, not the private.)

      Along these lines, the RIAA shouldn't have any issues with this "hack" because it doesn't open up any new avenues for pirating. (And it certainly doesn't do the same thing that PlayFair does.)

      The only reason that apple could be angry about this is because they now have lost control over the source of the airtunes stream. IMHO, however, this isn't really important, and apple probably should have/will introduce some public API for third-party apps to play to the airport express, or just build it into the OS. (Some have mentioned that the latency involved makes it impossible to watch DVDs, for example, which is why I think they haven't done this yet.)

      --john

  10. Driver! by nuxx · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Now all we need is some sort of software-based audio out driver for OS X (like Cycling 74's Soundflower) which allows you to reroute OS X audio output to the Airport Express. This would be *ideal*, as then it'd be possible to stream audio from practically anything to your stereo. Digitally!

  11. From the Site... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    So sue me
    Jon Lech Johansen's blog
    Wed, 11 Aug 2004
    Reversing AirTunes

    I've released JustePort, a tool which lets you stream MPEG4 Apple Lossless files to your AirPort Express.

    The stream is encrypted with AES and the AES key is encrypted with RSA.

    AirPort Express RSA Public Key, Modulus:
    59dE8qLieItsH1WgjrcFRKj6eUWqi+bGLOX1HL3U 3GhC/j0Qg9 0u3sG/1CUtwC
    5vOYvfDmFI6oSFXi5ELabWJmT2dKHzBJKa3k 9ok+8t9ucRqMd6 DZHJ2YCCLlDR
    KSKv6kDqnw4UwPdpOMXziC/AMj3Z/lUVX1G7 WSHCAWKf1zNS1e Lvqr+boEjXuB
    OitnZ/bDzPHrTOZz0Dew0uowxf/+sG+NCK3e QJVxqcaJ/vEHKI Vd2M+5qL71yJ
    Q+87X6oV3eaYvt3zWZYD6z5vYTcrtij2VZ9Z mni/UAaHqn9Jds BWLUEpVviYnh
    imNVvYFZeCXg/IdTQ+x4IRdiXNv5hEew==
    Exponent: AQAB

    MD5(JustePort-0.1.tar.gz) = fe13e96751958c6e9d57cce0caa7b17b

    1. Re:From the Site... by SiliconEntity · · Score: 5, Interesting
      This RSA public key can also be expressed in hex as:
      000000 e7 d7 44 f2 a2 e2 78 8b 6c 1f 55 a0 8e b7 05 44
      000010 a8 fa 79 45 aa 8b e6 c6 2c e5 f5 1c bd d4 dc 68
      000020 42 fe 3d 10 83 dd 2e de c1 bf d4 25 2d c0 2e 6f
      000030 39 8b df 0e 61 48 ea 84 85 5e 2e 44 2d a6 d6 26
      000040 64 f6 74 a1 f3 04 92 9a de 4f 68 93 ef 2d f6 e7
      000050 11 a8 c7 7a 0d 91 c9 d9 80 82 2e 50 d1 29 22 af
      000060 ea 40 ea 9f 0e 14 c0 f7 69 38 c5 f3 88 2f c0 32
      000070 3d d9 fe 55 15 5f 51 bb 59 21 c2 01 62 9f d7 33
      000080 52 d5 e2 ef aa bf 9b a0 48 d7 b8 13 a2 b6 76 7f
      000090 6c 3c cf 1e b4 ce 67 3d 03 7b 0d 2e a3 0c 5f ff
      0000a0 eb 06 f8 d0 8a dd e4 09 57 1a 9c 68 9f ef 10 72
      0000b0 88 55 dd 8c fb 9a 8b ef 5c 89 43 ef 3b 5f aa 15
      0000c0 dd e6 98 be dd f3 59 96 03 eb 3e 6f 61 37 2b b6
      0000d0 28 f6 55 9f 59 9a 78 bf 50 06 87 aa 7f 49 76 c0
      0000e0 56 2d 41 29 56 f8 98 9e 18 a6 35 5b d8 15 97 82
      0000f0 5e 0f c8 75 34 3e c7 82 11 76 25 cd bf 98 44 7b
      a 2048 bit RSA public key. The exponent is hex 0x10001, which is decimal 65537, a very commonly used exponent for RSA encryption.

      The fact that he just published the public but not private parts of the key suggests that Apple's product merely wants to see its input data encrypted with this key. I.e. anything encrypted with this key, it will play.

      Normally a public key is just that, public, and available to anyone. It sounds like in this case Apple kept the key somewhat secret, and used knowledge of that public key as a form of authorization. Only Apple products knew the public key, so it would only play music from those products.

      Now that the public key is published, anyone could encrypt data using it and get Apple's device to play the music.

      Jon hasn't broken any encryption here. He has merely learned how to encrypt just like Apple does. It looks to me like the DMCA does not apply to this case.
    2. Re:From the Site... by codework · · Score: 5, Informative

      As someone else who has recovered the public key from iTunes, I can say He did break a form of encryption. The public keys are encryped in itunes albit it with a very simple rolling xor algo.

      There is actually table of 255 public keys encoded in itunes. This is just one of them.

  12. Re:What? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    DeCSS was indeed released by the group, MoRE, 4 years ago (MoRE had 3 members, you call that "large"?).

    However, as far as I can tell Johansen no longer has any connections with MoRE. All the software on his site is GPL'ed and copyrighted by himself. MoRE is not mentioned anywhere.

  13. Re:What does it means? by Kristoph · · Score: 5, Informative

    The point of the hack is to permit you to stream audio to an AE from a program other than iTunes.

    ]{

  14. Yay! by Luckboy · · Score: 3, Funny

    Now I can divert all my system sounds to the Airport Express so I can get beeps in the living room in glorius 5.1 Surround Sound while I use the computer in the bedroom!

    Come to think of it, I'm ONLY going to do this when other people are watching TV! This is gonna be fun!

  15. Frightened by iamdrscience · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I read this headline as "Johansen Cracks Airborne Express Encryption". I was a little uneasy in that second or so before I read the blurb about the article.

  16. Re:Oh good by nefele · · Score: 4, Insightful

    and they invest millions to make inexpensive music downloads available (at almost no profit)

    No, they invest millions so they will get tens of millions in revenue from selling iPod. Don't get me wrong, I like Apple and I'm impressed by Steve Jobs's ability to resurrect the company, but it's still a company, not a charity.

    iTMS is selling songs cheaply to gain market share and get people to buy iPods, not to make inexpensive music downloads available.

  17. Re:Stupid stupid stupid by yamla · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Your country has a rather annoying tendency of assuming they have legal jurisdiction over the entire world. See Dmitri Sklyarov, for example. Jon Johansen should be safe provided he never sets foot on U.S. soil any point in his life (the major mistake that Sklyarov made). They probably don't care enough to extradite him (and would likely fail in any case), like they are attempting with Bobby Fischer (admittedly, a U.S. citizen at the time).

    --

    Oceania has always been at war with Eastasia.
  18. Too bad... by Kjella · · Score: 3, Interesting

    ...there is no DMCA here :D Of course, once the EUCD is passed into law (sooner or later), it may be a problem.

    Kjella

    --
    Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    1. Re:Too bad... by Trurl's+Machine · · Score: 2, Informative

      ...there is no DMCA here :D Of course, once the EUCD is passed into law (sooner or later), it may be a problem.

      Norway is not in EU.

    2. Re:Too bad... by Ost99 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Doesn't matter. Norway still has to implement EUCD.

      --
      ---- Sig. gone.
    3. Re:Too bad... by zokum · · Score: 5, Informative

      Yes, Norway is in fact the country implementing the EU-regulations the most (EU countries included) . We have a trade agreements etc with the EU, and we implement all the EU directives.

      We really should have joined EU a long time ago, and I find it absurd to not be in it. One can only hope. :-)

      If you want me to elaborate more, just reply, i can cite numerous examples, but I'd rather be on-topic to the post. But al in all, I agree with the grandparents post, it could smell trouble when the EU-DMCA comes into play....

      --
      Rest in peace Malin "looxn" Kristiansen. We miss you...
    4. Re:Too bad... by arcade · · Score: 3, Informative

      Last time I spoke to Per (Jon's father), he told me that Jon has moved to France. Still no DMCA, but maybe the EUCD will come in play quite a bit faster down there than here in Norway.

      --
      "Rune Kristian Viken" - http://www.nwo.no - arca
  19. AirTunes == Apple Lossless by frankie · · Score: 2, Informative
    To quote from MacFixit: AirTunes decodes your music on the local computer and then re-encodes it using Apple Lossless format before broadcasting it to the AirPort Extreme.

    Then AP Extreme converts from Lossless to standard audio. Makes sense now?

  20. Re:Lossless? by nlawalker · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I believe he's talking about Apple's Lossless codec, which lets you rip lossless, but still compressed (just not as compressed as mpeg or AAC) audio into iTunes.

  21. Re:What exactly does this guy have against Apple? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    First he cracks Fairplay, now this. What's his beef?

    What makes you think he has any?

    While spite may be one of the things that motivates 'crackers', the main reason isn't usually any kind of revenge.

    I have some personal experience, (having cracked some copy-protection schemes on games about 10 years ago), and my motivation wasn't any kind of personal vendetta.

    I just didn't like copy protection schemes that much; It felt like a withdrawal of trust. The main part of my motivation was simply the challenge.
    (And the reward of people thinking you were some kind of genius)

    Many people like to solve crossword puzzles, Richard Feynman liked to pick locks. Some of us like to reverse-engineer.

  22. Apple Responds Quickly... by PetoskeyGuy · · Score: 4, Funny

    ...by posting a story to slashdot his website while their lawyers and henchmen race towards DVD Jon in a black supersonic jet straight out of X-Men. (yes I verbed slashdot, but I googled and seems to be ok to do now)

    Seriously though, just hire the kid. Give him a 80 hour a week job and enough money he'll stick it out. No more spare time, no more cracks.

  23. Re:Lossless? by matthew.thompson · · Score: 4, Informative

    MPEG4 is not a single standard - but a collection.

    Among these there is a Lossless compression codec that Apple have put forward for inclusion into the MPEG4 collection.

    --
    Matt Thompson - Actuality - Insert product here.
  24. Assuming he's right... by Kjella · · Score: 3, Informative

    ...I suppose he's talking about the Apple lossless codec in a MPEG4 container format (it is more than just a video codec, you know...)

    Kjella

    --
    Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
  25. He's not a big genius. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Maybe it appears that way to the layman, but to other programmers and computer scientists, he's just doing what comes naturally.

    Almost any good programmer can crack software. They just choose not to, or to keep quiet if they do. Jon is a skilled showman as well as a software cracker. Hey, he got his ass saved from jail by the EFF when all he was doing is fronting others code. Now he's pretty much bulletproof (he doesn't release compiled executables as that was the main DeCSS sticking point), it's only right that he should continue to champion fair use and stand against lazy attempts to be "DMCA compliant", by cracking pointless encryption schemes which only require a little reverse engineering to find the barely hidden key, not cryptanalysis.

    I think Jon's doing us a real service, which I appreciate. I don't worship his genius, as he's only doing something I've done myself, albeit on much more media-friendly targets. He could just be cracking Safedisc games in relative anonymity for the same amount of intellectual effort, but instead he's hounding high-profile DRM schemes, starting with the weakest (Apple). Worship him if you want.

    1. Re:He's not a big genius. by aristotle-dude · · Score: 4, Insightful
      I don't think he is doing anyone a service. This is merely a way to inflate his ego. His actions could potentially ruin things for everyone. The Fairplay DRM is one of the fairest rights management systems out there as you can do anything you want with the music you buy except directly convert to a different format. Burning to CD is unlimited. What if his actions cause the music industry to loss confidence in that DRM?

      What is the alternative? WMA? do you have unlimited burns? No? Do you have uniform rights across all songs? No. Can you play WMA in all players including the iPod? No. Ok this last point is equally bad for iTMS and WMA stores but I don't like WMA. iTMS does have one advantage however, it is compatible with both the mac and windows.

      If Jon really was a genius and was trying to do the public a service, he would have cracked the WMA DRM. If he could come up with a way for me to be able to purchase songs on Napster (no iTMS in Canada yet) and being able to convert them to AAC format with EasyWMA to play on my mac and iPod, that would be useful to me.

      Destroying iTMS is not useful to anyone. Apple's DRM is the lesser of the two evils and it's free enough for me since I don't run linux. Jon is an man with raw intellect but no common sense.

      --
      Jesus was a compassionate social conservative who called individuals to sin no more.
    2. Re:He's not a big genius. by snackeyes · · Score: 4, Insightful
      The Fairplay DRM is one of the fairest rights management systems out there
      Doesn't change the fact that it's a DRM system and restricts Fair Use.
      you can do anything you want with the music you buy except directly convert to a different format
      Can I play the music on a set top box which supports MPEG4 AAC files? No, I can't. The DRM prevents me from playing my legally bought files. Unless I use iTunes that is. "Thou shall have no other players".
    3. Re:He's not a big genius. by ratsnapple+tea · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Well, but that's what you agreed to when you forked over your 99c. Them's the breaks.

    4. Re:He's not a big genius. by prockcore · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Apple's DRM is the lesser of the two evils

      The lesser of two evils is still evil.

    5. Re:He's not a big genius. by PriceIke · · Score: 2

      So burn it to a CD and play that on your set-top CD player. Or burn it and then rip it back off the CD. Apple's "DRM" isn't. It's to keep the music labels happy while wink-winking to users who know that, with the merest of applied efforts, the music can be freed from its ersatz "DRM" constraints.

      --
      It's not a lie. It's the truth with lossy compression.
    6. Re:He's not a big genius. by dasmegabyte · · Score: 2, Interesting

      True. But evil is subjective. I consider Apple's DRM to be a good thing -- because it gives the labels the peace of mind they apparently need to open up their music sphincters and let me get cheaply priced tunes while giving me enough leeway to do whatever I want with it.

      Sure, I'd prefer unencrypted 320 kbit AAC files...but this is not Mars, it's Earth and big corporations are still scared that digital media will kill them off. Give it another three years and maybe we'll see that sphincter open a little wider.

      --
      Hey freaks: now you're ju
    7. Re:He's not a big genius. by geniusj · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I have talked with Jon on a few occasions. His ego is not an issue. He is a very modest and friendly human being. You'd be surprised.

      Regards,
      -JD-

  26. Re:What exactly does this guy have against Apple? by Meostro · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Don't know for sure, but maybe he's just a Mac guy. Wants to crack CSS so he can stream under Darwin, Fairplay so he can use his music as he sees fit, and AEx so he can use his hardware as he sees fit.

    On the other end of the spectrum, maybe he's a hardcore PC guy that wants to use the brilliant systems (hardware and software) that Apple has created. iPods are lauded as the greatest thing since sliced bread, QuickTime, while a little bulky of late, has been an industry standard for years(vs. the bastard child WMV), and Mac software generally just works, and looks good doing it. Read the Apple Interface Guidelines sometime, just the bullet points on the main screen sum up their philosophy.

    I'd try to crack any product if I thought it was useful enough, i'm just not as demanding of compatibility as this fella. Of course I use Wintel (sorry tuxies), so 99% of what I want/need is either already made for my platform, or there is a decent-but-incompatible alternative.

  27. songs stripped of DRM transmitted through the air? by SuperBanana · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Anyway, back on topic, I never really understood why Apple felt the need to encrypt it in the first place.

    It is encrypted because otherwise you're transmitting copyrighted works over a medium easily sniffed. The AAC file you bought from iTunes, which can't be played on anything but the system you authorized it for (simplifying here, calm down nitpickers) would be transmitted unencrypted to the Airport Express. It would be an excellent way to decrypt your files and do whatever you want with them- all you would need would be a second machine with a wireless card, or probably even just running a sniffer locally on the system doing the transmitting.

    This is blatantly obvious and I'm not sure why the poster was modded up 5, Insightful- time to start meta-moderating again as it seems mods are getting lazy. Folks, if you've got mod points, check out some of the non-front page stories- they NEED the mod attention. I'm so sick of people just knee-jerk moderating, especially to posts which have ALREADY been modded up- and then people like me who eventually get mod points have to come along and mod something "overrated" to knock it down (only to be undone by some moron 5 seconds later who doesn't look at the comment's previous moderations).

  28. Re:What? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    It's worth mentioning that Johansen is a member of the open source VideoLAN project, which develops the libdvdcss library and VLC multimedia player.

    He reverse engineered FairPlay and added FairPlay support to VLC.

    Together with the fact that all his recent software has been licensed under the GPL this indicates that he no longer has anything to do with any "cracking" groups.

  29. Re:About DVD Jon... by mr_z_beeblebrox · · Score: 4, Funny

    He seems to be one of a handful of people who knows what the hell is going on.

    Why would the US Government want someone who "knows what the hell is going on". Hell, who would manage him? What department would he report to? Come on, your country is run by a man who probably uses "12345" as the combination on his luggage (encrypted of course, with his Cap'n Crunch decoder ring)

  30. Re:What does it means? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Then Apple should thank him. He just opened up the market for a hardware device Apple is no question making profit on.

  31. Re:Oh good by Jeremy+Erwin · · Score: 3, Informative

    they didn't "invent" OS X, they stole it from BSD and overcharged for it. keep shelling out your $130 every year for a "secure" OS.

    Darwin is free. Cocoa, Quartz, Carbon, and a number of other technologies that have nothing to do with BSD are not.

  32. Re:What? by snackeyes · · Score: 2, Informative
    Here's what the parent said:
    He is just a front figure of a large international cracking group.
  33. I don't see the threat to DRM media here... by Lurch00 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Can somebody explain to me how _this_ hack threatens the DRM protected content? AFAICT, itunes decrpyts the content, converts it to this lossless stream, reencrypts it to protect it in transit, and streams it to the AE. There's no threat to the DRM media here at all, since you have to have an unprotected source to start with.

    The real threat is that somebody will take this and figure out how to fake being an AE, then you essentially have iTunes doing the work of defeating its own DRM for you. This would have the advantage (from a piracy standpoint) of being fairly hard for Apple to fix via "bug fix updates", unless they built a way to upgrade the AE firmware the same way. That's something I can see people getting into a tizzy about, but for this particular hack I think the useful purposes far outweigh the piracy ones.

    Just a thought.

  34. Re:About DVD Jon... by Beaker74 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    That reminds me... I need to change the combination on my luggage.

  35. Must be a new definition of "cracked" by DavyByrne · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Since when is using a publicly available public key to encrypt a stream of data from an application and send it to a device considered "cracking?" It seems to me that this is a good ol' hack (read: clever piece of software), just like DeCSS or the other thing he did with protected iTunes tracks.

    I wasn't surprised that the first source I saw report this called it a "crack," but had hoped by the time the story made it to /. the error would be corrected.

    By the way, you do a real disservice to people trying to fight the DMCA by calling things like this "cracks." Lawyers for the bad guys already think these sorts of hacks are actually illegal cracks. You're bolstering their opinion by conflating the two.

    1. Re:Must be a new definition of "cracked" by jimmcq · · Score: 2, Informative

      Since when is using a publicly available public key to encrypt a stream of data from an application and send it to a device considered "cracking?"

      It may be a "public key", but the key was never pubically available before now. The public key was RSA encrypted... it was that encryption that was "cracked".

  36. Re:name by bloggins02 · · Score: 2, Funny

    Ummm, because "FlibDarg" was already taken?

  37. Re:Maybe I am not understanding, but by blackchiney · · Score: 2, Interesting

    IIRC, ALE is integrated into the quicktime codec. If you have an application that can use the quicktime Codec (iTunes, Quicktime player, IE, Safari, etc) then it can also encode/decode ALE streams.

  38. Re:songs stripped of DRM transmitted through the a by seanadams.com · · Score: 2, Insightful

    This is blatantly obvious and I'm not sure why the poster was modded up 5

    Somebody please mod SuperBanana down to -1 for this pinheaded comment.

    What he doesn't understand is that the Airport *does not even play the original AAC file*. It is converted to Apple Lossless in iTunes before the stream is sent down.

    So what's going over the air is simply a losseslly compressed representation of what's coming right out the s/pdif port IN THE CLEAR. And there's no way to get at the original AAC data from either stream, even if you could decrypt it, because it's already been decompressed in iTunes!!!

    The granparent's point is perfectly valid. The encryption over the air accomplishing nothing. It is just a placebo that Apple gives the music companies.

  39. Re:songs stripped of DRM transmitted through the a by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting


    It is encrypted because otherwise you're transmitting copyrighted works over a medium easily sniffed.


    Oh My GOD! Lets shut down commercial radio! (talk about easy to sniff) and those cars that drive by with the tunes cranked up and the windows down -- We need to send the RIAA weasel-boy after them. Someone nearby could have a tape recorder.

    Don't bother arguing about "pristine" digital copies. Yes, I know that over the air the format is lossless, but the fact that it was transcoded from a crappy MP3 makes the whole "Digital is different from analog" argument stupid.

    You want a gaping digital hole? Look at CD sales. If the RIAA cared about protecting high quality digital content from trivial "sniffing" they would outlaw the CD tomorrow. If course this is never going to happen. It is much easier to make a huge stink about a theoretical hole that may allow a trickle of dubious content get in the hands of folks who didn't pay for it than address the hemmorage of pristine unprotected content direct from the industry.

    Why is unprotected CDs OK, but unprotected airports somehow a threat to the industry?

  40. Re:Why is Apple's encryption so weak? by aristotle-dude · · Score: 2, Insightful
    Yes, because it is a "consumer electronics" device and they wanted to maintain performance. Stronger encryption could cause performance issues and increased costs of components. The encryption was to give the music industry some sense of security.

    Jon really is an asshole with too much time on his hands. What is he going to hack next? Satellite receivers? Computer controlled fridges? Microwaves? Leave our consumer electronics alone Jon.

    --
    Jesus was a compassionate social conservative who called individuals to sin no more.
  41. Re:What? by gtall · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Maybe you "elicit" requirements?

  42. Legitimate uses for this by Sturm · · Score: 3, Interesting

    One of the things that dissapointed me about the AEx was the inability to stream to it from other audio sources. For instance... Living in Kentucky, I don't have a clear view of the southern sky so I can't get Direct TV, so I can't get NHL Center Ice, so I can't watch my beloved Colorado Avalanche. Luckily for me, nhl.com streams the radio broadcasts of all the games via Windows Media Player. That works great since I can listen to them on my Mac or my Windows box. We had an old laptop connected to the stereo and via wireless connection could listen to the games. After last season, the laptop died and after I heard about the AEx I thought that might be cheaper than buying a used laptop to replace the broken one. But obviously, you can't stream to the AEx from WMP, so I was out of luck. I know I can buy some other device to stream audio to the stereo but we do use iTunes on both our Macs and PCs so the AEx would fit well into our setup.
    The point to this long, boring post is that *if* we could stream any audio source from any Mac/PC to our stereos, we would probably buy two or three AEx's. Apple gets my money for the hardware and I get my NHL fix and we are all happy (well, maybe not the Apple lawers but I'm sure they won't go hungry :)

  43. Re:Mirrors? by BestNicksRTaken · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Yeah, no sh1t!

    I think we need to implement something about Slashdotting, like you cannot post an article unless you're prepared to mirror the site/software you're talking about.

    Or maybe Slashdot should offer a small amount of space to mirror sites, then /. can /. themselves!

    How about a list of open Windows boxes we can use as FTP servers? ;)

    --
    #include <sig.h>
  44. Re:Why is Apple's encryption so weak? by mmusson · · Score: 5, Informative

    The strong encryption was not cracked. The implementation was cracked. No software-only based encryption is secure, period. The audio stream is encrypted with AES. AES is a symmetric key encryption sceme which means that both sides need the same key. The key needs to change over time or the encryption scheme can be cracked.

    This leaves the problem of how iTunes can tell the Airport the new key without everyone else listening and knowing the key also. Apple use RSA to secure the key transfer. RSA is a public key encryption system. This means there are two keys one public and one private. The private key is only known by the Airport. The public key is embedded in the iTunes software.

    When iTunes wants to send a new AES key to the Airport it uses the RSA public key to encrypt the AES key. This encrypted message can only be decryped with the private key that the Airport has which means the system is secure even though everyone hears the new key in encrypted form.

    The problem is that the RSA public key is embedded in the iTunes code. But that code needs to read in the key in order to use it and someone can reverse engineer this process to read the key themselves. This isn't necessaryily an easy thing to do but in a software only solution there is no way to stop it.

    --
    SYS 49152
  45. Re:What? by snackeyes · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Strawman argument. The parent didn't say prove, he said indicates.

    How many cracking groups release their source code under one of the member's full name and licensed under the GPL? The answer doesn't prove anything, but it does indicate something.

  46. Re:About DVD Jon... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    if Bush's playing at being stupid has actually convinced anyone that he is a dull man, then he's become more dangerous already. play stupid so people think you are harmless and at worst a target of caricactures, check.
    have a war so you have a good reason to pass fascist shit (cops can now wiretap you without a warrent, much easier to seize assets without a trial or an arrest, etc etc) PATRIOT act, check.
    by the way Cheney how's Halliburton doing? Osama's brother is glad you and he could work out so many deals together.

  47. Is this really a crack? by mpaque · · Score: 4, Informative

    It appears that he's just published the public key. That may allow him to ENCRYPT music for play over Airport Express, but it doesn't let him decrypt the stream.

    Heck, I put a public key for mail in my .plan and sigs. I don't think that enables anyone to crack my mail. They can SEND me mail, but that's sort of the whole idea, isn't it?

  48. Re:What? by alatesystems · · Score: 2, Interesting

    "I have people skills! I'm good with people, damn it! Why can't you people see that?!" -- Office Space

    Also, you had a brainfart on illicit vs. elicit. Illicit is illegal. Elicit is to extract information. You should concentrate on bettering yourself and your language skills before you claim to know Johansen. For all you know, he could be a well-adjusted nerd.

    DRM is bad for consumers. Consumers who purchase DRMed items should be ashamed for perpetuating this travesty against our society.

    I wholeheartedly support Jon and I hope he continues to crack these DRMs. After he cracked FairPlay, I actually bought a few iTMS songs (which I wouldn't before) and then transcoded them into MP3 to play in my car deck. Then I realized I was helping Apple DRM so I stopped buying them again. Until companies trust their customers, the world of digital media is going to suck, BADLY.

    Chris

  49. AE Streaming Protocol by derubergeek · · Score: 2, Interesting
    Since the link is still being hammered, and I'm the impatient type, I ran tcpdump on an iTunes to AE stream.

    From what I see in the dump, it looks iTunes queries the AE via RTSP, configures it with a password if need be, and then sets up an RTSP record stream to the AE. After that, it just pumps RTSP packets to it.

    Part of the RSTP ANNOUNCE request is an RSA AES key.

    --
    Trust me. This is an inactive account. Regardless of what the /. bean counters might report.
  50. Apple doesn't care about the RIAA because... by Enthrash · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I think we can all agree that in our profit obsessed society most electronic gadget manufacturing companies care about one thing: profit.

    That said, consider the following:

    Current Revenue Figures for Major Record Companies:

    2002 Warner Music Group (sold in 2003): $4.2B USD
    2003 Sony Music: $5.3B USD
    2003 Universal Music: $5.0B USD

    2003 Sony Electronics Revenue: $41.1B

    SOURCE: Respective 2002, & 2003 corporate annual reports.

    As you can see, the COMBINED revenue for the top 3 music companies can't come close to Sony's electronic arm ALONE. Pick some other electronic companies and you'll arrive at exactly the same answer.

    This is exactly the reason Sony manufactures MP3 players today. Companies can make far money from electronics than they ever will from music, and this simple economic fact does not bode well for the music companies.

    They can pay lobbyist, the electronics companies can pay MORE lobbyist. They can pay off politicians, the electronics companies can pay off MORE politicians and on and on.

    Rich...

  51. Not really a threat... by Otto · · Score: 2, Informative

    The real threat is that somebody will take this and figure out how to fake being an AE, then you essentially have iTunes doing the work of defeating its own DRM for you.

    I investigated this justeport program yesterday, to see what it would take to do exactly that. My goal was not actually to defeat DRM, but to possibly create an emulator for being an AE, so that I could use iTunes to play songs on other computer's speakers. The thought of piping the music to a file did cross my mind, but that was not the goal.

    But the short answer is that there's not enough in here to do it.

    The way is works is that you generate an AES key. You encrypt that key using the RSA Public Key. You send that to the AE, which decrypts it with its private key. Then you use the AES key to stream the music over.

    To pretend to be an AE, you need to know the private key inside the AE. Without it, you can't decrypt the AES key iTunes sends you, and you can't decrypt the stream of music.

    Faking the protocol is pretty easy, since it's mainly RTSP with some extra headers. Faking iTunes into seeing you as an AE device is also pretty easy. Just use various Rendezvous utilities to broadcast yourself as an available RAOP service. But you can't decrypt the stream without that private key.

    In theory, you could modify a copy of iTunes by changing the public key in there. Then you could make it work with your AE emulator program, but it wouldn't work with real AE devices anymore. Still, could be useful if you want a wacky way to bypass the DRM. ;)

    --
    - Give a man a fire and he's warm for a day, but set him on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life.
  52. OT: Saddam by wolrahnaes · · Score: 2, Insightful

    US laws can apply wherever they please. Ask Saddam.

    Umm...Saddam violated many UN resolutions. Those are international law. The UN was just a bunch of pussies and wouldn't enforce their own laws (partly because of those fucktard French holding up the UNSC), so we did it for them.

    aah....feel that karma burn...

    --
    I used to get high on life, but I developed a tolerance. Now I need something stronger.
    1. Re:OT: Saddam by david.gilbert · · Score: 3, Insightful
      so we did it for them.

      And we all bow down before you in gratitude, because now we are all safe from Iraq's weapons of mass destruction.

      You throw names at the French, but in fact Germany and Russia joined them in insisting that the weapons inspectors should have more time before resorting to an invasion. With hindsight (or even a little foresight, many would argue), it seems they were correct.

      But let's just continue calling the French horrible names, shall we? In the name of freedom, of course, because that's what this is all about, right?

  53. Have to update the AE devices.. by Otto · · Score: 2, Interesting

    In order for such an update to work, it'd have to be an update to the AE devices themselves. And they'd have to update iTunes at the same time. And then it'd be probably just as easy to break open iTunes to get the public key again, and there you go.

    What they really are worried about is somebody hacking apart the AE device and finding the private key. With that, I could write an AE emulator that would receive transmissions from iTunes... And totally bypass their DRM as well. Not that their DRM is effective anyway, but it's just one more way to do it, you know?

    --
    - Give a man a fire and he's warm for a day, but set him on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life.
  54. Music Industry? by Otto · · Score: 4, Insightful

    What if his actions cause the music industry to loss confidence in that DRM?

    LOL!

    Understand this... The "music industry" is royally screwed seven ways from Sunday. They know it too, don't kid yourself otherwise.

    See, they need *customers*.

    In order to exist, the music industry has to convince people to buy what they are pushing. They're between a rock and a hard place here, because if they make that DRM too obnoxious, if they go beyond the line too much, then their own customers will flip them the bird and jump right back onto P2P networks. It's already happened once, in their eyes. Does the P2P scare back around 1998 ring a bell? Napster? Back when it didn't quite suck, I mean.

    See, Napster opened a new world for the music industry, because it showed them that the world had changed and now they had to compete with "free". How in the hell does one compete with free products?

    DRM is a reaction to this, by trying to make it difficult for people to convert their products into a format than can easily become "free". Unfortunately, this is an impossible task. It's *proven* to be impossible, no less. So they now have to not only compete with "free", but to do it, they have to do something that's absolutely and totally impossible to do. What a bind that puts them in, huh? :-)

    The music industry is scared shitless, and with reason. This new medium takes their products and puts it into a form that:
    a) damn near eliminates distribution costs,
    b) makes low cost viral marketing into one of the most powerful forms of marketing there is through the rapid dissemination of the meme in question,
    and c) eliminates all ability to control distribution of their product and thus be able to charge for it.

    A and B they love, but C is included in the bargin and they cannot escape it. Furthermore, they're starting to figure out that the combination of A and B on a large enough scale eliminates the need for the middlemen in their business. Artist and customer can directly interact just as easily as middlemen and customers can. Since most of them are middlemen, this naturally makes them nervous. Right now, they're engaging in heavy media spending to combat this knowledge, leading to the current meme of "taking music without paying is stealing" and so on. They're engaging it on both the artist side and the customer side, and if both sides would just wake the hell up, the middlemen would be out of jobs.

    So what I'm saying is that the idea that they can NOT offer their product on the internet is an unrealistic notion. They don't have that choice, not really.

    If they don't offer something out there, in a light enough restriction no less, then what will happen is that they eventually die off. People will go back to passing around music for free, legislation and lawsuits be damned, they will find a way to do it safely if it comes down to it. Many very bright people are already looking for that way.

    And if the artists see that the music companies aren't actively trying to make them some cash by selling their music online, the artists might start waking up en masse and seeing that the old system is unnecessary with the new technological capabilities to directly reach the customers.

    So the music industry *will* sell online. They don't have a real choice not to do so anymore. They can no longer pack up their toys and go home, because that would be a losing move.

    --
    - Give a man a fire and he's warm for a day, but set him on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life.
  55. We're winning against DRM by KjetilK · · Score: 2, Insightful
    I don't think it will. We're winning this, DRM won't have the protection it has under the DMCA, I'm pretty sure.

    The DeCSS case raised a lot of awareness, and if you compare the reaction in the mainstream towards DeCSS with stories they print now, they are very different. About DeCSS, they were decidedly hostile, now it ranges from neutral to printing HOWTOs on cracking crippled CDs. Several commentators have started to understand why DRM is bad, and so we've got the big mainstream media's attention. In fact, it looks like they are grabbing headlines from /. :-)

    Recently, a parliament member from the liberal party (Venstre, a small member of the ruling coalition) expressed support for Electronic Frontier Norway's amendment to EUCD, which will allow people to access legally obtained content with any means necessary and allow creating of tools to do it. I'm also very certain Socialist Left (SV, a medium sized opposition party) will support this too. Two major parties, the conservatives (Høyre, which is in government with the liberals, go figure), and the Labour party say they await a report from the Consumer Ombudsman's office. They haven't held a very clear position on DRM, but I expect it to come out in opposition to DRM.

    With all this, I think EFNs proposed EUCD amendments have a very good chance of being included, and in that case, we'll still have a pretty well balanced copyright regime. It will still be possible to develop stuff that is not under the absolute control of the entertainment industry, and that may just save freedom of expression and technological progress for everyone.

    --
    Employee of Inrupt, Project Release Manager and Community Manager for Solid
  56. Re:Why is Apple's encryption so weak? by mmusson · · Score: 2, Informative
    So does this mean that it IS possible to hijack the airtunes stream?

    No. The key thing (pardon the pun) is that there are separate public and private keys. What he has done is isolate the public key (the one iTunes has) which would allow a separate program to send a stream to the AE just as iTunes does. But to decrypt the stream coming from iTunes you would need to know the private key that is embedded in the AE.

    An important part of public key encryption is that knowing the public key does not allow you to determine the private key easily. This is a one-way hack.

    --
    SYS 49152
  57. Re:songs stripped of DRM transmitted through the a by Raptor+CK · · Score: 2, Insightful

    It's there to protect Apple from the Idiot Problem.

    That's the problem in which some idiot sets up an open WLAN and starts sending songs to the AirPort Express.

    While the idiot does this, his neighbor, the resourceful hacker, sniffs out the Ethernet frames, pulls down a stream of Apple Lossless Format audio, and saves it to his disk. Now he, and anyone else with technical expertise in range, will have any audio sent to the unit, including music purchased that the iTunes Music Store.

    No loss, no fuss, and as long as you don't re-encode it, you've got audio just as good as what Apple's selling, although it's a bit larger.

    The encryption isn't to protect the owner of the music or the hardware. It's there to keep you from inadvertently broadcasting music to anyone else. If you want to make a CD of iTunes Music Store tracks and copy that CD a few million times, they can't stop you. That's your choice. They're just limiting the distribution of this content in a way that only shares your music with the parties and devices of *your* choosing.

    Yes, it's mostly to placate the music companies. What really throws me off is that people on Slashdot, a fairly security-savvy site, are complaining about *more* encryption. I certainly don't want some bozo capturing the audio I'm supposedly only broadcasting to my AirPort Express. If this makes it tougher for him to do so even after somehow cracking my WPA setup, then Apple's doing something *right.*

    --
    Raptor
    "Procrastination is great. It gives me a lot more time to do things that I'm never going to do."
  58. A simple criterion to know if you are the sucker by file-exists-p · · Score: 2, Insightful

    There is a simple criterion: if you, the user, have a way to read your private keys, it is fine. Encryption is here to help you. When your stuff is encrypted and you can not read your own private keys, the encryption is not here to help you. And you are, definitely, a sucker.

  59. Re:nitpicking by steve_bryan · · Score: 2, Insightful

    "Hey, can your neighbor snoop your S/PDIF port and record off it? No? Thought so. Can some guy with a cantenna a mile away sniff your S/PDIF port?"

    I think you are missing a significant point in this story. Jon's hack does NOT crack Apple's encryption. If he had managed to crack AES/RSA this would be a much bigger story. The losslessly compressed stream being sent to Apple Express whether from iTunes or a JustePort equivalent is still an encrypted stream. Without Apple's private key you cannot read the stream. Jon found Apple's corresponding public key and followed the details how iTunes sets up the stream and emulates them in his product.

    Nobody's encryption has been cracked. The reason it is called a public key is because it can and usually has to be made public in order to be useful. But being public in no way compromises the security of the encryption as long as the corresponding private key is not revealed.