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.
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
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.
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).
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
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 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.