Slashdot Mirror
Cracking iTunes' DRM with JHymn
comforteagle writes "Howard Wen has interviewed 'FutureProof' of the JHymn project, a DRM removal application for iTunes song files laden, or 'crippled' as some say, to prevent filesharing. FutureProof tells us how Apple's DRM works, how to rip it out using JHymn, how they build on the work of 'DVD' Jon Johansen, and how to upgrade to that brand new iShuffle safely."
Probably "Send the lawyers. Have him killed immediately."
At this point, I've decided to get out of the game. No IRC-crawling, no Kazaa, no DRM-breaking.
It's much easier to use the five-finger discount.
I hope stuff like this teaches companies no one wins with DRM. Not themselves, as they're made look incompetent when DRM is cracked ("Protected CDs" rippeable pressing CTRL?), and certainly not their customers.
If it's digital, and the end user can see / hear it, it can be copied. Perfectly. Deal with it, and make it interesting to buy instead of pirating.
'If you encrypt it, they will come...'
HA! I just wasted some of your bandwidth with a frivolous sig!
Admittedly, without the thrill of "fighting the man", but in this case "the man" is giving you virtually everything you asked for (inexpensive music you can try before you buy with the ability to download exactly what you want and make mix CDs, which you could then rip as well without needing this tool.) Now Apple is going to have to crack down again.
What does this win us? The music industry can point to this as another example of why the restrictions need to be in the hardware and the hardware manufacturers are already in their pocket as far as the next generation of motherboards are concerned. Thanks to the pirates, those of us who buy the stuff again have to pay with further restrictions.
Try not. Do or do not, there is no try.
-- Dr. Spock, stardate 2822-3.
for iTunes song files laden, or 'crippled' as some say, to prevent filesharing.
or crippled files to prevent me from doing whatever I want with the files I BOUGHT, thankyouverymuch. I don't share, I don't pirate, but I demand total freedom when it comes to changing from one's format to another.
When Hymn first came out (under a different name) they released iTunes 4.6 almost right away which would not see files that the old Hymn had converted - by recognizing one aspect of the converted files that was particular to Hymn generated files.
Hymn released a fix in short order - I think back in July? It was a long time ago anyway. And since that time, Apple has done nothing to shut down project-hymn.org. And multiple releases of iTunes since then have done nothing to stop these files from playing - which it cannot do because they are now identical to files that you rip from CD yourself with AAC!!
If Apple could or would do anything about Hymn, they would have done it by now.
Since sales on ITMS have kept going up, no-one really cares if you can break the DRM or not.
I'm not sure if Hymn still does it, but it used to even keep the ID of the owner in the file to make it impractical to share on P2P networks (as it could easily be traced back to the owner). I thougt that was a nice touch to show it really was not meant for piracy.
I use Hymn myself, no to crack my master files but to break them so I can share them at work. The annoying thing about iTunes sharing is that if another user is not authorized to play a song it halts and brings up a dialogue, making true random play over another users library impractical. Once a co-worker and I even went so far as to authorize each others computer to play our music so that we could listen to the libraries of the other.
I don't feel like using DRM cracks for this use is at all like P2P, since it's just streaming the song and not transferring it - plus lots of people discover music they might not have otherwise and it helps those artists out (which I feel P2P does as well, but it's a different and much greyer case).
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
To churn through 10 GB of music I had either purchased through iTunes, or ripped myself using AAC (drinking the koolaid made me use AAC over MP3). All legally obtained. Why? TiVo desktop cannot play AAC/m4p files, only MP3. So I either spring $200+ for and airport card and airport express to stream my music to the stereo, or convert it to something more useable. Worked like a charm. I wouldn't have to do it if Apple/TiVo would get it together and let me use my music on the gear I already own.
"dvd jon went had to go thru a lot of hell for what he did"
Dvd jon proved to us that we have a right to use our purchased media in whatever way
we see fit as long as we don't break copyright (or other) law.
EULA? what EULA!? I'm copying music from my computer to my mp3 player, then
on to another computer, all for my personal use, in the privacy of my home.
No law broken here.
You can also burn any iTunes track to CD. Only limit is you can only burn 5 copies of a playlist before you have to change the songs in the playlist. Which means if you or your friend spring for the cost of a CD, you can share any song you like, as many times as you like, with whomever you like, just like other physical media.
I think that's a super middle-ground. Steve Jobs has discussed MANY times that DRM will be cracked, but FairPlay is pretty good. Apple puts a sticker on all their iPods that says, "Please don't steal music." Please point me to a better approach to DRM or filesharing scheme. Yes, DRM sucks, but it's not going anywhere if you want to use downloaded RIAA music.
Not since Marie-Antoinette played milkmaid has looking simple and honest been so fake and complicated.
I love folks complaining about "crippled" iTunes songs.
They forget that Apple has SET THE STANDARD for sensible DRM that is reasonable for the consumer.
I've been around a long time, and have seen plenty of stupid stuff. Divx (in the DVD space) moved things back, lawsuits and claims about the mp3 format itself, a joke.
But I've also got a sense of history. Before apple came along legal online music was GHASTLY.
You think iTunes is "laden" and "crippled" with DRM? People have forgotten that before apple came along there was a fragmented music space with DRM that meant you couldn't move songs between computers, burn them to CD's, and stores run by companies that were no fun to do business with. Subs, if you canceled, your music vanished.
For most folks, fairplay is actually fair. Most people don't end up playing on more then five computers. Unlimited burns of a song, and seven burns of a specific CD are reasonably fair. The authorization process isn't terribly painful.
Remember, the RIAA used to claim on their dumb soundbyting site that making a tape copy of a CD was copyright infringment. And they were probably right, it was.
The one big issues with iTunes are lack of open source support (tricky, but they should do better here) and the lock-in to iPods as the portable music player for the service. The issue is that software needs to provide the DRM. Luckily for apple they've got a reasonable ipod product. This lockin will have to evolve though of course, open source and linux are not supported so far.
But from a DRM perspective, they really moved the industry forward. If the media companies had their way we'd be stuck with Sony's ATRAC format.
So, complaints and props to apple.
I use this to remove the DRM from my legally purchased iTMS files so I can play them on my Phatbox in my car and on my Media Center PC. I'm not distributing them to friends, I'm just doing what I would have otherwise done by burning to CD then ripping back to HD.
Probably still illegal nonetheless, but I really don't feel very 37331 when I do it.
If it weren't for Apple's DRM on the music sold through the iTMS, there would be no iTMS. No way to buy that one track you like. No way to support the artists that deserve the support. None at all.
Your turn.
NetInfo connection failed for server 127.0.0.1/local
If you give up control, you get what you deserve.
sulli
RTFJ.
once you make your mix CD and burn it as an audio CD all DRM is gone. if you give that mix to your friend Todd and he rips it to his machine (Mac/M$?Linux/bla) there will be no DRM on it anyway.
iTunes has some limit to the number of burns a playlist can have...... but you can either change the playlist by mixing around one song, or take one burnt CD and just use disc copy on that "master" cd.
Now if Apple licensed Fairplay playback to device manufactures and software developers, that might change people's opinion but as it stands now, Apple computer has a monopoly of fairplay enabled music playback. I would suggest that Apple open Fairplay, but as we all know, the concept of DRM is simply PKI turned upside down. Its a game of digital hide and seek or "security by obscurity," so it is simply not possible to open source any software based DRM scheme.
Lets look at this situation from another angle, if Microsoft was the leading online music retailer and used a format that could only be played back on Microsoft hardware and software products, would people be defending them? The hypocrisy and denial of Apple fanboys on /. is so blatant, its not even amusing anymore.
This isn't flamebait - it's true. DRM costs money - removing it generates revenue. Counterintuitive? Case in point:
An iBook came into my household this christmas. I had heard about iTunes for years, but not being on Windows or Mac, had never seen more than a screenshot. So anyway, I try it out and buy an album I once had but lost to a departing girlfriend. It was cool, but I also knew it was DRMed - and indeed, when trying the file on my linux box - no joy. I didn't buy any more music after that. No way would I pay for music I can only listen to on one computer (I want it to work at home (linux/new mac), work (linux), studio (linux)). So I didn't buy any more music - then I heard about Jhymn - installed it, stripped the DRM off my files, txr over to my linux box, and voila - lot's of joy.
That was about a week ago - I've spent over $30 on iTunes in short time since then (it's frighteningly addictive and easy to click "buy" - especially when sleepy late late at night). Without DRM stripping I would have spent a big fat ZERO.
Moral of the story:I only buy from iTunes BECAUSE I'm able to strip the DRM and play the files on my linux boxes
What changed under Obama? Nothing Good
Thats not a "link". That is a "URL"
This is a link.
And I have no doubt that Apple really doesn't have a problem with you stripping the DRM. As you say, you are now partaking of the crack that is the iTMS, you are happy, Apple is happy.
But *legally* Apple cannot condone any DRM strip scheme. The problem here is not with Apple.
All things considered, Fairplay is a pretty amazing concession from the RIAA in the first place.
...a DRM removal application for iTunes song files laden, or 'crippled' as some say,...
"Crippled" is when something isn't working the way it was intended. Songs from the iTunes Music store work the way they are supposed to. If you don't want DRM laden music, don't buy it.
Two Minus Three Equals Negative Fun -Troy McClure
FutureProof said that Apple is putting watermarking in their music and they are looking for the lack of that watermark in future versions of iTunes (both to stop competitors and most likely identify those who would rip from iTunes and resell it illegally). Nothing has stated that the watermark is an Apple-wide watermark (i.e. distributed to all users) or if it is a per user watermark added on top of the Apple watermark (double water-marked).
Unless this makes your head swim, there is an excellent book that most folks with a bachelor's degree in some field which involved math should be able to read and understand: Information Hiding Techniques - Techniques for Steganography and Digital Watermarking (ISBN 1-580-53035-4), by Katzenbeisse. This and some other related books can been seen at forensics.nl.
Note: I am not affiliated with any of these publishers or authors, but merely read through the above mentioned book and found it appropriate for the topic.
As this sounded like BS, I did a quick Google:
i me _overview.html
:-)
http://www.mostchoice.com/business_insurance_cr
Found others too.
As a business owner, believe me, there is insurance for pretty much anything. The only question is whether the premiums are worth it. My broker would be happy to fill you in.
Larry
You seem to be under the (mistaken) impression that iTMS makes any money. By the time they pay the royalties and pay for the infrastructure, there's essentially nothing left. Apple runs iTMS solely to sell iPods; that's the only place the money is.
--Hi. I'm in Portland and it's raining. This appears to be a permanent condition.
Exactly! As if I don't have enough coasters as it is! Plus, copy to disk, move it to another computer -- that's so "sneaker net". Why bother with a LAN if you're just going to copy-walk-copy. And last of all, I can't play actual cds on my computers because for at least the last several years, I've been too lazy to connect the cd player to the sound card - just more effort than it's worth.
What changed under Obama? Nothing Good
Your life would have been oh so much easier if you'd just found that little "burn" button in the upper right-hand corner of the iTunes window.
Why did you choose to do it the hard way? And more important, are you trying to say that the only place you've got copies of these songs that you bought and paid for is on hard drives? Why didn't you burn them to CD anyway for permanent safe-keeping?
Uh dude 3/4 of the article was about why that is not true at all. Two reasons were given. First, Ipod and Itunes memorizes what songs were bought from the music store. If it sees that song with out the DRM it wont play. Amusingly it will play on any machine that did not purchase that song, it just wont play on a machine that did purchase it. Second, apple may be watermarking the songs. So these songs ARE distinguishable from songs you ripped yourself to AAC.
Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
The thing is, the word "intended" means very different things to the user downloading the songs than it does to the people selling them.
You can't say "works as intended" to a user of the songs, because their intent is different than the DRM designers. DRM is never built to help the customer in any way, only to restrict end-user rights.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
JHymm's method = no loss of sound quality, the file is the original AAC data.
Goofy burn to CD and re-encode method = much loss of quality, creation of artifacts etc.
Enough said.
People always seem to use the CD-R burning argument in Apple's defence. If you take these steps, you've got a library full of paid-for music that's been compressed twice. Yuk.
If you buy music from iTunes, none of your music is of archival quality. For that, you need to store your music as AIFF of FLAC files.
In an ideal world, where everyone has lots of bandwidth and storage, people would buy their music online in FLAC format, which they can do whatever they like with: burn to CD, convert to MP3 etc. Sadly, that's not the direction we're going in.
" If you want to "support your artists," then you shouldn't give money to the RIAA companies. Fact is that the vast majority of the money you pay for CDs doesn't go to the artists, but to the corporate coffers."
Huh? About 30% of the price you pay for a CD goes to the store that sells it to you. Likewise, most of the money that the record company gets for the CD goes to paying the various people who helped create the CD. "Corporate coffers" sounds like you think it's going into some Gringots-style bank; the reality is that when you buy a CD, a mouse, or most any other consumer good, most of the money you pay ends up paying somebody's salary. In fact, the record industry makes do with margins that are lower than the PC mouse industry, so it's likely that if you buy a CD and a mouse, a higher percentage of the cash you paid for the CD will end up going to help somebody make their living.
"Why do we like breaking DRM? Because if I pay for something, I might want do things with it. You know, throw it on a few computers, play it in my stereo downstairs and also have a copy up at my summer home (I'm dreaming). The Constitution gives us that right, and calls it Fair Use. DRM attempts to defeat our constitutional rights, something that nerds don't like, you dig?"
The constitution says nothing about "fair use rights," and neither does US copyright law. If you'd like to learn more, you can read what US code has to say about fair use. There's also the Wikipedia entry and EFF primer. Fair use doctrine gives you a set of legal outs if you're brought into court for copyright infringement (ie. you can attempt to use the guidelines in that section to show that your actions were fair use), but fair use doctrine most definitely does not disallow a rightsholder from taking steps to prevent their work from being copied in an unauthorized manner.
Either way, you're allowed, under fair use doctrine, to make a copy of music you've purchased for personal use. I do this all the time with stuff I've purchased from iTunes, without breaking their DRM -- the folks at Apple who set up the DRM policies took a sensible approach, and their DRM allows me to move tracks between multiple iPods, make backups of the tracks, burn them to CD as often as I want, and even burn multiple copies for friends (which is definitely not fair use, but iTunes doesn't stop me from doing it anyway). In short, Apple's DRM has not stopped me from doing anything I've wanted to that would fall under the realm of fair use. Apple's DRM does not allow me to put a track in a P2P share directory so dozens of people I don't know can download it and listen to it, but that's not "fair use" by any stretch of the imagination.
If you ever come across a music download service that doesn't allow you to make copies for personal use, then that service is retarded and will hopefully die the death it deserves. Apple's DRM is remarkably easy-going, and I think this is one of the reasons that the iTMS is such a wild success.
Sitting in my day care, the art is decopainted.