Slashdot Mirror
DVD-Audio's CPPM Circumvented
Bodysurf writes "After DVD-Video's CSS encryption was broken in 1999, the music industry chose a much more secure copy-protection method for DVD-Audio called Copy Protection for PreRecorded Media (CPPM). This protection scheme has remained publicly uncracked, but it was circumvented recently, providing the ability to save the unencrypted digital audio data. CDFreaks has the details."
We deserve our free use.
And we will take it by any and all means.
RTFA again for the best results.
Sadly, they will never learn.
-SS "Teach the ignorant, care for the dumb, and punish the stupid."
What was that saying?
"To view it, we have to decrypt them. If we can decrypt them, we can rip them."
The only "secure" media format is a CD laminated between two plates of steel.
Hilary Rosen's speech was about her love of money and her desire to roll around naked in a pile of money.
"For every lock there is a key"
Gotta love fair use!
Visualize Whirled P.'s
Because so few people care about DVD Audio? Most people's ears (and rooms) aren't good enough for 24/96 audio. My interest in high-end audio disc formats ends with DTS, which was a real clever hack in how it used a standard CDDA audio data stream.
--
"Open source is good." - Steve Jobs
"Open source is evil." - Microsoft
I know this fight against the Man is so very romantic, but the companies can opt out of this arms race in which the hackers have the advantage. The more and more this encryption breaking is done, the industry will spend less and less money on developing new encryption schemes, and instead spend more and more on buying Senators and Representatives to pass draconian measures to prevent you from legally trying (thinking about how) to break the schemes.
I imagine the only reason it took so long is because no one gives a damn about DVD-Audio (: The last DVD-Audio disc I actually saw was the test one that came with my previous DVD player.
Now the copyright cartel will probably just kill the format, and try again with stronger encryption.
The problem isn't so much the strength of the encryption. It's more that they are trying to use encryption to do something encryption isn't very good at doing.
This, of course, is not meant by me to imply that any form of mass-consumer DRM is at all uncrackable. They're all doomed in my view.
Hence they are often combined with legislation to attempt to outlaw cryptoanalysis.
That's what always cracked me up about the RIAA's parinoia over DVD-A. They burdened it with protections, set it so you can't get the full signal over a digital connection, etc. Why? Internet copying. Of course it seems the majority of Internet copying is 128k or less MP3s, often reencoded form another compressed format and/or recorded from an analogue line in.
The people who trade that kind of stuff are not going to bother sending DVD Audio around. I mean it is on the order of 50MB per MINUTE compressed.
The kind of people who have the money for a system that you can appreciate the extra detail on aren't going to squabble much about buying the discs.
Now if they could crack a format that is actually used, like DRM:ed WMV/WMA.
(Yeah, I know Freeme cracks the old version)
My other comment is funny
If the situation were sane, people would buy more DVD-Audio.
Here's why:
As cited in the article, this only compromised WinDVD. CPPM, like CSS, has player keys that are specific to the player hardware/software being used. This did not actually reclaim the player key from WinDVD, and even if it did, the player key can be deactivated in future releases, so that future DVD-Audio DVDs can still play. Hence, for true cracking, all of the player keys need to be discovered.
Furthermore, if only WinDVD is compromised, it will send a signal to content companies to support such formats as SACD, as the format's design naturally prevents playback (and hence any sort of ripping) on computers entirely (as the technology has not been licensed).
On the other hand, the last few times the industry tried this (DAT, 8-Tracks, SVHS...) have not been that well recieved. The industry would have to cut the prices on the DVD-Audio discs below that of CDs to get people to swich, and there is no way those greedy bastards are going to do that.
I read the internet for the articles.
This is just the same thing. Right now, DVD audio is an obscure thing that few people have heard of or seen around, and even if you know it exists, you gotta be crazy to buy one. Now it should become less crazy, and publishers will start to have a reason to use the format.
You just can't seriously be in the market until your format is usable. It's just common sense.
As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
I think a real problem for DVD-A is the previous two decades of direct-to-digital production. If a recording was made to 16/44.1 stereo masters, there's absolutely no point in releasing it on high definition multichannel media. The best you can hope for is to sound exactly like the CD, and what's more likely to happen is a corny surround remaster where the drum kit is inexplicably behind the listener. So there's this huge catalog of (mostly pop) music from the 80s and 90s made to low-definition digital formats, and they can never be improved by DVD-A nor SACD.
One reason MP3 encoding has caught on is because it takes 10 minutes to rip and encode a CD. I doubt it would be as popular if everything was recorded in real-time.
I remember using l3enc to encode back in the day and it was slow as hell compared to today's tools (this was after using CDDA to rip the audio). This was probably more my machine than anything, but if I recall correctly, encoding was about real-time. It didn't stop anyone. All it takes is one person to do it and then it's ready for everyone else.
The post doesn't promote piracy. While it's easy to see how this tool could be used for piracy, and it's likely it will be used for piracy, all it does is allow the user to make an electronic copy of media that's already in his physical possession. Remember, if you don't already own a CPPM-protected disk, then this utility is useless.
/. story on DRM. But I'll keep repeating it as long as there are people wiling to parrot the industry crap about DRM being used to prevent piracy. Either that, or the mods start flagging me as "Redundant."
The purpose of CPPM (and just about every other DRM system) isn't to control piracy. As far as the pirates are concerned, most DRM systems are rendered irrelevant before the first protected media is ever produced. I can go online right now and download a DRM-free version of "Revenge of the Sith," but I couldn't acquire a protected version even if I wanted to. So when the DVD is released and it's "protected" by CSS, who are the studios trying to protect it from?
CPPM is similar. Connect to a P2P network and search for "DVDAudio." This stuff is already out there. If I want to get it without paying for it, I can download it right now, and this WinDVD patch is of no use to me whatsoever. If I'm a pirate, I don't give a shit. But if I'm an honest consumer and pay for my music in DVD-Audio format, then I have audio content that I can't play on my iPod. This is what this tool is useful for.
DRM doesn't control the pirate, it controls the honest consumer.
I feel like I make the same post every time there's a
The value of a CD isn't in the bit of plastic, but in the music it contained and in the freedom it granted for you to listen to it whenever you wanted.
And yes, there's a more specific legal term for the act. There's also a perfectly good generic term for it as well. And people who do steal would prefer to hide the fact under a mask of doublespeak and a cloak of rationalization.
But I can see why others would prefer "infringement", as it sounds SO much better than stealing. Infringe? Why that's barely stepping a tippy-toe over the line... hardly worth even mentioning.
Any sect, cult, or religion will legislate its creed into law if it acquires the political power to do so.
1: Company A cracks Company B's more successful player and distributes said crack over Usenet.
2: Company B's keys are revoked, rendering their players useless.
3: PROFIT!
A 3-steps to Profit is a short pipeline indeed.
"It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
You're missing something important: most people simply don't have audio gear of sufficient quality to make higher resolution formats worthwhile. And with consumer electronics all being made in China now as cheaply as possible because people value price over quality, this isn't about to change.
What's more, I really don't think most people could tell the difference anyway, because so many people have poor and/or damaged hearing thanks to all the loud noises we're exposed to constantly, or thanks to age.
You are being somewhat selective in your civic values.
I do not think so. As someone who worked as a Customs Inspector for almost a decade and seized many many hardware and software components under the DMCA, I have a keen understanding of the intention and use of the DMCA. It was implemented with the intention of curbing the flow of violative software and the hardware that enabled use of illegal software. It also enabled businesses to better control their marketing districts.
Preventing consumers from fair use activities was never part of the stated reason for the legislation nor were we ever instructed during our briefings to look for articles that would prevent consumers from manipulating legitimate (legally obtained and distributed) software and hardware.
My background stated, I will also assert that I have no problem putting copyright violators in jail or with the seizure of illegally produced and distributed works. I am not advocating any type of free-for-all. I believe people should be fairly compensated for their efforts.
However, /. dislike: My favorite was the court decision that third-party garage door openers are NOT a violation of the DMCA because Congress never intended the DMCA to limit consumer options. Good ruling but this is why I have become cynical about the current usage of the DMCA. It is no longer being applied to the "bad guys" but instead is being increasingly used by corporations to lock consumers out of their rights and choices.
since my time as an Inspector, I have observe many businesses try to warp the usage of the DMCA to their own ends. And not just the usual targets of
The manipulation of the DMCA in effort to extort more money out of the consumer or monopolistically control the consumer is unacceptable and unethical.
I stand by my previous statement.