Slashdot Mirror


Sony DRM Installs a Rootkit?

An anonymous read writes "SysInternals.com guru Mark Russinovich has a detailed investigation of a rootkit from Sony Music. It's installed with a DRM-encumbered music CD, Van Zant's "Get Right with the Man". (Mmmm, delicious irony!) The rootkit introduces several security holes into the system that could be exploited by others, such as hiding any executable file that starts with '$sys$'. Russinovich also identifies several programming bugs in the method it uses to hook system calls, and chronicles the painful steps he had to take to 'exorcise the daemon' from his system." This house is clear.

75 of 801 comments (clear)

  1. My question: by conJunk · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Now is that *sony's* rootkit, or a soon-to-be-former-sony-employer's rootkit?

    1. Re:My question: by ryanr · · Score: 4, Interesting

      If you read the article, there's a strong implication that this is a purchased commercial rootkit. Presumably, Sony very deliberately licensed and distributed it.

      Mark didn't get into a lot of detail about all of the functions, but he didn't mention any backdoors or phone home functionality.

    2. Re:My question: by networkBoy · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Honestly, I see this as a real exposure to a lawsuit. If I accidently install this rootkit on my system, then try to remove it (seeing as it looks like a genuine security breach) and then disable my computer, thus having to bring it in for service what then?. If a malware company uses the rootkits ability to hide $sys$ prefixed files and uses that to steal my identity, costing me thousands of dollars and hundreds of hours of time to get my identity back, can I sue?

      -nB

      --
      whois gawk date unzip strip find touch finger mount join nice man top fsck grep eject more yes exit umount sleep dump
    3. Re:My question: by interiot · · Score: 5, Informative
      The rootkit is by First 4 Internet. It's possible that Sony simply purchased this DRM from this outside company, not realizing that the DRM contained a rootkit.

      Still, one would hope that Sony would only choose reputable suppliers, ones who wouldn't allow a virus/trojan to be distributed intentially or even through neglect.

    4. Re:My question: by eln · · Score: 5, Insightful

      And nobody at Sony bothered to vet a piece of software that was destined to be shipped with millions of CDs? It's beyond absurd that a company of Sony's size would allow a piece of software to appear on any of its products without Sony having tested the hell out of it first.

      I think it's far more likely that Sony knew what this software did, and chose to distribute it anyway. This could have been a result of incompetent testers, poor communication between QA and management, overbearing management anxious to get a product out on a strict deadline, or any number of other things.

    5. Re:My question: by utlemming · · Score: 4, Insightful

      However, it might not protect them from a product liability suit. Simply put, if that had happened to me, I would have bought a new hard drive, reinstalled everything and then copied the data that I needed over, and then filed a product liability suit. I would claimed everything from illegal computer trespass, product liability, vandalism, and anything else that might have sounded half-way reasonable. The fact that a root-kit was installed on the computer to protect music shows that privacy now takes a second place seat to some one-else's property rights, when that person isn't even present. In this case one the music industry, if allowed to get away with it is violating privacy and property rights of another person in order to protect their property rights.

      --
      The views expressed are mine own and do not express the views of my employer.
    6. Re:My question: by slavemowgli · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You can always sue. The real question is: will you win? And even though IANAL, I'd say you have a pretty good case here; if the EULA does not even *mention* any of this, then it probably constitutes an illegal act.

      --
      quidquid latine dictum sit altum videtur.
    7. Re:My question: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny
      > It's beyond absurd that a company of Sony's size would allow a piece of software to appear on any of its products without Sony having tested the hell out of it first.

      You never played Star Wars Galaxies, did you?

    8. Re:My question: by DoraLives · · Score: 5, Interesting
      Actually this is a major limited access high speed expressway to seriously fuck with Sony.

      It'll go like this: Somebody out there with an axe to grind against Sony is going to lift this code intact, with no modifications, and marry it with a worm that goes around and infects peoples machines with some nasty or other that executes with a file that has a name beginning with $sys$ and cause some real trouble with it.

      Net result, the infected folks are going to have a SERIOUS beef with Sony over the fact that the "invisible" file was able to install itself and run its merry course completely under the radar. All because of a piece of shit attempt by a fucked up Giant Corporation that was attempting to further line its pockets by installing some ... shall we say, hmm, unsavory code?

      Ok script kiddies, you have your assignment. Now get to work!

      --
      Is it fascism yet?
    9. Re:My question: by Thing+1 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I hereby offer $200 toward this goal.

      --
      I feel fantastic, and I'm still alive.
  2. In democratic america... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    corporations exploit YOU!

    hrm, so much for humor. I don't find it funny at all :/

    1. Re:In democratic america... by conJunk · · Score: 5, Insightful
      damn... you know it's getting scary when the soviet russia joke is not only unfunny, but frightening....

      i don my tinfoil hat and robe...

    2. Re:In democratic america... by nmb3000 · · Score: 4, Funny

      i don my tinfoil hat and robe...

      Wow, a tinfoil hat and robe! When do the pants and underwear come in? :)

      However when you said "hat and robe", my first thought was of Bloodninja's cyber adventures.

      --
      "What do you despise? By this are you truly known." --Princess Irulan, Manual of Muad'Dib
      /)
    3. Re:In democratic america... by caluml · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Or as Osama says: "I'm free - what about you?"

    4. Re:In democratic america... by nmb3000 · · Score: 5, Informative

      corporations exploit YOU!

      Insightful indeed.

      The thing is that there is more than a corporation here. The artist that chose to sign with Sony is now going to feel the repercussions of this dirty little trick Sony tried to play. Do you think that Sony really cares if they loose a few sales of this one CD because they got caught red-handed? Of course not.

      These record labels are not only exploiting the consumer, but they are screwing over the artists that depend on them for advertising and distribution. Here is contact information for Van Zant. Let them know that you're pissed. Let them know you won't be buying their CD. Let them know that they were screwed by Sony. While you're at it, why not let First4Internet know that you hate them and hope they burn in Hell for writing malware like this. A few thousand emails will do wonders for these jerks.

      If enough artists move away from these corporate labels it can only mean good things for the consumers. It's not impossible for this to happen, just extremely difficult.

      --
      "What do you despise? By this are you truly known." --Princess Irulan, Manual of Muad'Dib
      /)
    5. Re:In democratic america... by chrysrobyn · · Score: 4, Insightful
      In democratic America... corporations exploit YOU!

      I've read two relevant quotes.

      "Democracy is the theory that the people know what they want and deserve to get it good and hard."

      "In communism, man exploits man. In capitalism, it's the other way around."

  3. as if by scenestar · · Score: 5, Insightful

    DRM wasn't intrusive in the first place.

    --
    perpetually dwelling in the -1 pits
  4. Anti-spyware Bill by AKAImBatman · · Score: 5, Insightful

    We *really* need to get a anti-spyware bill on the books. Something along the lines of, "It shall be a criminal offsense to install non-application software on any computer when the user has not been reasonably notified in advance and/or agreed to have the modifications made. This bill will be reevaluated for its effect in three years."

    Anything running in the background, rootkits, and other forms of spyware (which generally rely on the user not knowing they're there) would immediately become illegal.

    1. Re:Anti-spyware Bill by AKAImBatman · · Score: 4, Insightful

      shall we define "non-application software"?

      The bill would actually need a definition of "application software" so that anything that doesn't meet that definition would be automatically covered. e.g. "Application Software refers to a self-contained program that is installed on the consumer's computer. To be considered self-contained, it must not modify the operating system to execute any software at any time other than when the user runs the software in question."

      what constituteds "agreed to"?

      The courts do. Considering the difficulties they've been giving to the click-through licensers, I'm perfectly okay with that.

    2. Re:Anti-spyware Bill by AKAImBatman · · Score: 4, Interesting

      That's where the "reasonably notified" comes in. The courts haven't been too happy about EULAs as they are. If you try to slide things past the consumer, the courts will find that the contract was misrepresented and hold the company accountable.

    3. Re:Anti-spyware Bill by queenb**ch · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Problem #1 - Mr. Spyware Programmer in Nigeria where such things aren't illegal.

      Problem #2 - Mr. Identity Theif in wierd 3rd world country where such things are illegal but are tactitly condoned by local authority as long as its not someone from their country

      Problem #3 - Mr Corporate Lobbyist - RIAA & MPAA ring any bells????

      Problem #4 - Your privacy has been dead for decades. The sad part is that people are just now starting to smell the rotting corpse.

      Passing a bill here in the USA will only do what CAN-SPAM did - drive them off shore to less regulated places. What's really needed is the ability to establish peering points that co-incide with national borders. Then we can pass a law that says that if we don't like your data integrity laws, we don't pass traffic to/from you.

      See if that doesn't actually accomplish what you're looking for.

      2 cents,

      Queen B

      --
      HDGary secures my bank :/
  5. RootKits coming out in bundles? by cwtrex · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I'm downloading RootkitRevealer now. I wonder how long it is going to take for Norton and McAfee to upgrade their Rootkit detection abilities? Next years anti-virus release? The last rootkit that Norton found on a computer at work was well spread and had been out for 6 months. It still was unable to remove/fix the infection. :(

  6. Didn't Notice? by KidHash · · Score: 4, Funny

    Not that this makes it better in any way, but I liked how he said

    I hadn't noticed when I purchased the CD from Amazon.com that it's protected with DRM software, but if I had looked more closely at the text on the Amazon.com web page I would have known

    followed by a picture of the amazon web page in question with [CONTENT/COPY-PROTECTED CD] clearly visible in massive letters.

  7. Is the EULA valid? by nweaver · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Since spyware WITH a proper EULA has been held to be in violation by the FTC, and since this EULA doesn't really mention the rootkit's difficulty of removal, this might be litigatable.

    Of course, Mark Russinovich did (inadvertantly) dissasemble content protected by the EULA.

    --
    Test your net with Netalyzr
  8. Re:and now with no liability by redshadow01 · · Score: 5, Informative

    RTFA, the EULA does not mention this at all...the writer of the article made a specific point with respect to this.

  9. Sony has gone too far... by chrispyman · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It's one thing to copy protect your CDs to make it difficult to rip but it's another thing to install a rootkit that is by definition difficult to remove. Who'se going to clean up this mess when a Microsoft patch or SP comes around and breaks any computer with this installed?

  10. Thanks by BCW2 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I am very glad to hear about this. That CD WAS on my birthday list for next week.

    Sony just lost a sale, end of story.

    --
    Professional Politicians are not the solution, they ARE the problem.
    1. Re:Thanks by Flower · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Don't tell Sony. Tell the Brothers that they lost a sale. Let them know that the product they worked so hard on now has poorly written software on it that could damage your computer. And through you want their music you can't buy it and you're going to tell your friends not to risk buying this CD.

      --
      I don't want knowledge. I want certainty. - Law, David Bowie
  11. Re:OS's fault by redshadow01 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Yeah, that's called "Trusted Computing"...where Microsloth decides what you can and can't run...

  12. This has gone too far! by Billly+Gates · · Score: 4, Insightful

    What is next? Drm that will rewrite your bios and turn your pc into an expensive doorstop for copyright violation?

    As if spyware itself is miraculiously legal and now we have this? Rootkits and spyware programs that append to windows in the mbr so even a reinstall wont delete thim IS TOO FAR!

    I agree with a previous poster that is should be a criminal offense the same catagory as spypainting someones house or breaking an entry. Why do we allow this crap to be legal?

    Its time we wrote our elected officials and inform them about what is happening and about Sony's drm and demand civil and criminal responsibility for malware makers. I dont care if its the CEO of some company spraypainting my house vs a teenage kid. Its still illegal and Sony should be held accountable.

    I was reading on cnn about the drop of ecommerce even though there is still a rise in internet usage. This is due to all the spyware/scams/malware that is infecting pc's at record rates. This is killing out economy and many companies such as Google, Amazon, and Ebay are already getting hit with their wallets over these scams.

    Lets organize and make a difference. This is a slippery slope and I fear what is coming next.

    1. Re:This has gone too far! by burnsy · · Score: 4, Informative

      "What is next? Drm that will rewrite your bios and turn your pc into an expensive doorstop for copyright violation?"

      Yes, look for it in your next Blu-Ray Disc Player.

      http://www.engadget.com/entry/1234000737057152/

      "On top of that, consumers should expect punishment for tinkering with their Blu-ray players, as many have done with current DVD players, for instance to remove regional coding. The new, Internet-connected and secure players will report any "hack" and the device can be disabled remotely."

    2. Re:This has gone too far! by mcrbids · · Score: 4, Interesting


      Lets organize and make a difference.


      OK, let's. I assume that this is a call to join a foundation, organization, or movement. What have you decided to call this organization? What's the mission statement? What are the goals of the organization? Meeting times? Rallies?

      Yep, I just might be interested. Really.

      If you're serious, that is - but I don't think you are. See, if you were, you'd have to stretch yourself outside of your current "comfort zone", which currently includes your computer, and quite possibly your mother's basement, but not much else.

      But, if you WERE serious, and you REALLY DID put out enough effort to register a domain name, make a website, put together some business cards, talk to REAL LIVE PEOPLE (instead of your laptop) at real, live events, you'd find out very quickly what real, live people think. You'd grow immensely, as a result. Your skills at working with people, and your earning power would be forever improved, and your understanding of your true role in society would be much, much firmer.

      You would forever be a bigger, better person.

      I dare you to put together an organization of at least 100 members towards your cause. In order to be a "member", they have to have contributed at least $10 in CASH towards your cause's war chest. (And, I know you can do it, because I did)

      --
      I have no problem with your religion until you decide it's reason to deprive others of the truth.
  13. TIme to... by heinousjay · · Score: 4, Informative
    --
    Slashdot - where whining about luck is the new way to make the world you want.
  14. Re:Hmm by redshadow01 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    To make matters worse, not only is everything hidden, but you can't just delete the files and reg keys or you'll cripple your system...the author of the article is a developer and he spend a lot of time just getting rid of the damned thing...I know I couldn't do it

  15. Re:What is it exactly? by RingDev · · Score: 4, Informative

    Being a root kit just means that the program works at the OS level, USUALLY in such a way that the end user will not notice it, nor will virus detectors flag it. It changes something about "Windows" as opposed to adding something to it. (over simplified)

    The arbitrary code in this case is installed when you hit 'OK'.

    -Rick

    --
    "Most people in the U.S. wouldn't know they live in a tyrannical state if it walked up and grabbed their junk." - MyFirs
  16. Re:What is it exactly? by abscondment · · Score: 5, Informative

    You're confusing the terms "rootkit" and "trojan"/"backdoor".

    A trojan in its strictest sense tricks a user into executing one set of code when they think they're executing another. A backdoor simply allows remote execution of arbitrary code.

    A rootkit is usually the set of tools that an attacker deploys on a compromised system. "rootkits" in the terms of this article are programs that trick your kernel into doing things it shouldn't do. This could include a trojan or a backdoor, but not necessarily.

    Sony's program is a rootkit because it runs without authorization from the CD and alters the Windows API in order to disguise itself. As far as the article indicates, it doesn't include the ability for Sony to execute code on your machine. It's still dirty and sinister, if you ask me. It also allows any other malicious attackers to conceal anything they plant on your machine - simply by prefixing any file name with $sys$ - that's not cool!

  17. Re:OS's fault by speeDDemon+(nw) · · Score: 5, Informative

    Trusted Computing...

    I think this lil video on Trusted Computing is perfect at explaining trusted computing.

    I leave it running on the computers on display in my store. Hopeing that I can educate enough people in my small section of the world about the follies they are about to embark on.

  18. What if you refuse the EULA? by BeBoxer · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I know you can disable auto-run and such to get around this type of crap. But what happens if you just 'disagree' or whatever on the EULA? I assume that Sony will then not install the rootkit and you can rip the CD with whatever tool you normally use? Or does Sony install the rootkit anyway, setting themselves up for criminal prosecution? Does anybody have a copy of this thing to try and answer that question?

    It just seems kind of silly to have DRM which is totally dependant on the user to request it be installed. Or can refusing an EULA be considered a violation of the DMCA?

  19. EULA's do not trump the law by LM741N · · Score: 4, Informative

    You can't enter into a contract which violates the law. Thus a "contract killing" is not a valid contract.

  20. Here is what a kid had to say... by cyclocommuter · · Score: 5, Interesting

    ...after he tried to rip another Sony produced CD "Healthy in Paranoid Times" by the Our Lady Peace:

    Disappointing, to say the least..., October 14, 2005

    A Kid's Review (Amazon.com)

    I tried copying this CD, not knowing that it was protected. So, I ripped it to my hard-drive and burned it. But, when I inserted the burned copy into my computer, the screen froze for a while, and an installer icon appeared on the taskbar in the bottom right. It installed somthing - and now I cannot burn anything, with any program. I've even tried using a different, external CD burner. A disk error comes up during burning, even if I am not not burning audio CDs. This was not a fluke. I've talked to other people this has happened to. Avoid anything with "copy protection." Sony might as well burn viruses onto the CDs they distribute.

  21. Re:But... by WWWWolf · · Score: 4, Informative
    Yes, some people DO install the stuff that comes with their CD's, because sometimes that "crap" gives them the ability to rip so many licensed copies of the song to share with friends.

    After being presented with a sell-your-babies-to-the-almighty-record-label EULA, and before shoving awfully encoded WMA format files down their throats.

    Hint #1: There's no "copy protection" on CDs. For most parts, it's misshapen multi-session CDs. cdrdao read-cd --session 1 ... Hint #2: If you're encoding the files to MP3, Vorbis or, good heavens, WMA, digital rips are wayyyy overrated and plain old CD player, analog RCA-to-RCA cable and an audio recorder app can do really wonders. =)

  22. It's immoral to buy RIAA music by Jason1729 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I used to buy a lot of CDs but stopped around the time of the napster lawsuit. I would probably still be buying 2-3 discs/month if I didn't consider it immoral to buy CDs.

  23. Awesome by suwain_2 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    On this CD's product page, there are several negative reviews on account of spyware. My favorite puts into plain English why this is bad: "I am very unhappy, since I now listen to all of my music using my IPod."

    I think this is the way to fight DRM. When we complain about DRM rights, we're fighting a crusade on principle, and few people really get what's wrong. When you say, "This CD that I paid for can't be transferred to my iPod," people will see that it's outrageous. When people see that it's installing spyware on your computer, they'll flip. Cheers to whoever's left this feedback.

    --
    ________________________________________________
    suwain_2 :: quality slashdot p
  24. *phew* by Alan · · Score: 5, Funny

    I'm glad I get my music off of p2p networks and don't have to worry about trojans and rootkits and that evil hacker stuff!

  25. Re:OS's fault by hal9000(jr) · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Easy, Don't run as ADMINISTRATOR. Run as a regular user!!!!!!!

    Come on, man. It's 2006 already

  26. Re:What is it exactly? by sakusha · · Score: 5, Informative

    You obviously didn't read the article very closely. Sony patched the CD/DVD drivers, Sony's code runs every time you access the drive. He didn't disassemble the entire driver so there is no clear indication that it doesn't contain security problems (whether by incompetence like a buffer overflow, or a deliberate backdoor) that would allow arbitrary code to run. There is no way to audit the code for security, it is probably illegal under the DMCA to disassemble and fully analyze DRM code in sufficient detail for a full code audit
    THAT is the biggest problem with these windoze DRM hacks. You can secure your system with all the technology at your disposal, but it means nothing when you are tricked into running a rootkit disguised as DRM. Then you have to trust the DRM vendor did not make any mistakes that expose you to further security risks.

    People like to gripe about Apple's DRM, but at least they know better than to pull crap like this.

  27. Sony is protected by the DMCA by dmoen · · Score: 5, Interesting
    I see this as a real exposure to a lawsuit. If I accidently install this rootkit on my system, then try to remove it...

    If you do this, then you are deliberately disabling a copy protection system, which is illegal under the DMCA. So Sony can sue you.

    [Note: this varies with your jurisdiction. No DMCA in Canada, yet.]

    Doug Moen.

    --
    I have written a truly remarkable program which this sig is too small to contain.
    1. Re:Sony is protected by the DMCA by hazem · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Doug, I think you're wrong.

      I can disable a copy protection system on my own computer - specifically removing it. They didn't have permission to put it there, and I think it would be a tough case to prosecute me for repairing my own computer. My computer is not Sony's medium to do with as they please - it's MINE - I paid for it, and I licensed the software.

      Now, removing the protection from their media - or extracing the content and freeing it from the DRM, yes, that's circumvention, and probably prosecutable under the DMCA.

      But my computer is MINE and they don't have the right to secretly fuck with it.

    2. Re:Sony is protected by the DMCA by indigoid · · Score: 5, Interesting

      indeed. for the purpose of deciding who is running something, is autorun.inf "us" or "them" ?

      --
      P-plate adventurer
    3. Re:Sony is protected by the DMCA by br0ck · · Score: 4, Funny

      Suing them IS trying to remove it, so suing them invokes the DMCA.

    4. Re:Sony is protected by the DMCA by shibashaba · · Score: 5, Informative

      Consumer puts a cd into their computer with the intention of playing the cd. The cd takes advantage of a feature in Windows and installs software in the background without your knowledge. No court would find Sony not liable for damagaes caused because the user didn't disable autorun. It's the same as an email viruses, just because the user never turned off macros doesn't let the person who runs the virus off the hook.

      This isn't the first time Sony's had this idea. Years ago they asked someone to write a virus to subliminally provide marketing to people. This motivated the person they asked to write a book called Coercion.

      --
      ---------- Open Source is capitalism applied to IP.
    5. Re:Sony is protected by the DMCA by Fnkmaster · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I call BS on this. When you put what you think is an audio CD in your CD ROM drive and click on the drive icon, you don't expect to be giving permission to anybody to install a rootkit.

      Furthermore, your argument is simply insane, even if applied to software CDs. Do I give permission to any software vendor to install anything they want when I run the installer executable? Do I give them permission to wipe my hard drive? Install malicious, intentionally uninstallable programs? Monitor my activities when not using their software?

      Even the most ardent proponent of EULAs couldn't make the claim that you give such permissions by default. Unless they specifically ask, they don't have permission to do anything that isn't specifically part of the product as a reasonable person would perceive it to be.

    6. Re:Sony is protected by the DMCA by mrBoB · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Unfortunately, this is only something that could be dealt with at a trial. Whose rights are more valuable, the content provider, or the paying customer? A person has a reasonable expectation of privacy and security on his or her home computer. Any attempt to circumvent this privacy or security should be construed as trespass. On the flipside, recording artists and the companies that represent them have an expectation that their work is compensated, and that "legal" means to protect their interests be respected. I'm not arguing for the DMCA here, however it _IS_ law. By removing the Sony-installed malware, Mark has broken the law. But so is trespass illegal, so tell me, which is a greater abomination?

            I'd vote for trespass, but I also don't have any content to sell. Mark, how's the adminpak selling? I hope you've got some good DRM on your CD's if you're any indication of the talent that's out there...

    7. Re:Sony is protected by the DMCA by Suddenly_Dead · · Score: 4, Insightful

      An EULA in the booklet? Do you have to read and click agree on the booklet before you can use the CD? A contract like that isn't going to hold up if one party doesn't agree to it in the first place, or may not even have knowledge of its existance.

      When I buy a CD, I shouldn't have to expect it to install a rootkit, and have to check the included materials to see if it does; it's Sony's responsibility to tell me they're messing with my software, and ask for consent...

    8. Re:Sony is protected by the DMCA by Anonymous+Brave+Guy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      They'd better hope it's them, because if it's us, then it's not circumventing their copy protection scheme to hold down shift while I load the CD, is it?

      On the other hand, if it's them and they install software on my PC without my permission in the UK, my lawyer would like to talk to them about the Computer Misuse Act.

      Oh dear. This sounds like a lose-lose proposition for Sony. That's really, y'know, too bad and all. :-)

      --
      If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
    9. Re:Sony is protected by the DMCA by spagetti_code · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I dont think this is right.

      He didn't remove the DRM for access to songs.

      He removed the DRM from his computer (effectively
      a manual uninstall). They did imply in the document that he was allowed to uninstall it.

    10. Re:Sony is protected by the DMCA by gstoddart · · Score: 4, Informative
      They don't put it there. You do. They just packaged it for you. If you didn't want to give them permission to run arbitrary executables on your computer, then WHY DID YOU RUN THEIR EXECUTABLE??

      See, the problem with this is you did not give them permission. You didn't even run their executable. It happened without your expectation, knowledge, or consent.

      You popped in what you thought was a nice little audio CD. Because Microsoft has been configured to run the software on these CDs by default, you end up running it -- that's not permission. When you put in an audio CD, you expect to hear, well, music. Not to have something installed on your computer which compromises its security.

      You can't say that someone accepted terms of use when Microsoft, acting in conjunction with these companies, decided that what needs to happen is that any CD with executable code on it needs to be executed blindly and without user confirmation.

      For the vast majority of users, playing a CD in their computer is shockingly like playing a CD in their CD player. It is neither a tacit nor an explicit agreement to run any and all software they may have installed on it.

      It is a complete mis-representation to claim that you gave permission for them to do anything they wanted to do with it. If I open my door to a solicitor, that doesn't give them the right to enter my home and do anything they damned well please.

      This absurbd notion that what is, in effect, trojan software has been accepted by the user simply because they decided to play an audio CD in their computer is complete and utter tripe. And saying that you "should have known better" is a complete cop-out -- we already know that the vast majority of computer users simply lack the knowledge to prevent this sort of thing. Especially when the OS manufacturer has decided a priori for you that is what will happen.

      Now, if they put in big honking letters on the CD case that if you play this CD on a Windows machine, software will be installed on your machine, your argument might have merit. But the simple fact that it is NOT spelled out in big font, means that, for all intents and purposes, this is a trojan.

      Imagine extending this totally absurd argument to credit cards -- 'by handing your credit card to the waiter to pay your bill, you tacitly agree to paying for the staff trip to Aruba'; Oh, didn't know? How dare you? It's a bullshit argument in either case, because you imply consent where, clearly, none was given.

      In either case, you show me where the user has actually agreed to anything, and your point might be valid. Otherwise, it's after-the-fact rationalization based on the absurd notion that the user knew what would happen.

      Now, I realize as I'm writing this that your ID lists you as Andrew Tanenbaum -- so I'm forced to conclude one of two things -- 1) It's a popular, but misleading name on Slashdot, or 2) the Great Andrew Tanenbaum has absolutely no clue about what is reasonable for a company to do to the end-users machines. In either case, I'm not impressed. If 2), then you're just a standard Slashdot schmoe, and I expect nothing more, but you're still misinformed. If it truly is 1), then I've lost a great deal of respect for you -- because a professor of this stuff should know better, because you bloody well get paid to be informed about this stuff. Asserting that you somehow gave permission somewhere in that process is utter crap! An agreement I was never shown is null-and-void.

      Cheers

      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    11. Re:Sony is protected by the DMCA by Alsee · · Score: 5, Informative

      I don't know why this idea keeps cropping up, and particularly why it got modded to 5. The DMCA most certainly does NOT permit circumvention for Fair Use purposes.

      US Law Title 17 section 1201:
      Circumvention of copyright protection systems
      (a) Violations Regarding Circumvention of Technological Measures.--
      (1) (A) No person shall circumvent a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title.


      The act of circumvention itself is indeed criminalized by the DMCA.

      Note that the DMCA also says:
      (c) Other Rights, Etc., Not Affected.--(1) Nothing in this section shall affect rights, remedies, limitations, or defenses to copyright infringement, including fair use, under this title.

      That sounds pretty good, right? Except it's pure bullshit, law literally written by lawyers employed by the publishing industry. It means absolutely ZERO. It says it protects/preserves Fair Use defenses to Copyright Infringment. However CIRCUMVENTION CRIME is not copyright infringment. Circumvention crime has absolutely nothing to do with copyright infringment. There is no Fair Use defence to cricumvention crime. So what that section really says is that a NONEXISTANT defence is not affected. It sure sounded nice though, didn't it?

      -

      --
      - - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
  28. Answer: This is truly evil by shanen · · Score: 5, Insightful
    So should I sell all of my Sony stock, or buy more?

    Seriously speaking, this shows two things. One is yet another demonstration of the fundamental evil of Microsoft's "security" model. Even if you weren't running as root/Administrator (and everyone does, don't they?), then the "reputable" installation from the "reputable" company would just ask you to elevate your privileges.

    The other thing is that power is always abused. If not now and by Sony, then tomorrow by some other "reputable" company. (Or put on your tin hat and say "Yesterday by the NSA.")

    I hope they track this story, and if it is not another misguided /. rumor, I certainly hope that Sony repudiates the technique and the software. Soon.

    Then they should apologize.

    Then sack the person responsible.

    Then sack the person responsible for not sacking the responsible person earlier.

    [Infinite loop warning.]

    --
    Freedom = (Meaningful - Coerced) Choice != (Speech | Beer^2), and sad sock puppets' bad mods avail them naught.
    1. Re:Answer: This is truly evil by ezzzD55J · · Score: 4, Informative
      So should I sell all of my Sony stock, or buy more?

      Offtopic, but..
      If you think a stock will move but don't know in which direction, buy get and put options at the current price. They'll be in the money after any significant stock movement. Called a Long Straddle.

  29. Britain's Computer Misuse Act... by jd · · Score: 4, Interesting
    ...could probably be used in this way, for this software. The program was unquestionably not authorized by the user, as it is not declared in the EULA. As there is no apparent (yet) "Phone Home" capability, it would not violate the Data Protection Act. It might violate tresspass/break-and-entry laws, as the only reason the hacker of Prince Philip's e-mail account escaped conviction was that a transient tool was not considered a lockpick. This is a permanent tool that permits repeated intrusion, so I would guess the courts would be more sympathetic to the argument that it was breaking and entering. IANAL, but most people in computing in Britain have covered the DPA and CMA to some degree, because these are things IT people need to be careful of. It is possible - though unlikely - that the EU could also prosecute Sony over this, as it may infringe on privacy and computer protection laws in Europe. It's very doubtful the EU would take such action - they barely took any action against Microsoft for anything it did - but if Sony or other companies agravate the situation enough, there ARE elections in Italy coming up and the ruling elite there could do with someone to victimize.


    America - well, there's no privacy in the US of A. The trade in personal information is open and widespread. There is an excellent chance that if anyone tried to prosecute Sony over privacy infringements that it would be laughed out of court. You can't protect what you don't have. Posession is 9/10ths of the law, and Americans posess very little - much as they often like to believe otherwise.


    Sony actually has a much stronger case. Reverse-engineering their DRM scheme is in direct violation of both the letter AND the spirit of the DMCA, which is explicitly intended to prohibit exactly this kind of research (ie: the study of the spyware) and this kind of result (ie: the removal of it, afterwards). Depending on who Sony licensed the rootkit from, there is a possibility it might also violate aspects of the PATRIOT act. (If the rootkit is also used by any law enforcement groups, then this study could compromise wiretapping provisions in the act.)

    --
    It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
  30. Incentivising Piracy by SpecBear · · Score: 4, Insightful

    My refrain to the copyright holders: The people being hurt by this DRM software are people who have already communicated their intent to do the right thing by purchasing the CD. Sony has just guaranteed that a lot of people will never make that mistake again.

    Welcome to a Brave New World: People who pay for their music get viruses, while people who download it at no cost from illegal sources get clean MP3s that they can freely copy and use on whatever devices they own.

  31. Re:Wouldn't happen if you dont run MainstreamOS. by spaceyhackerlady · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Want to stop this nonsense from happening in the future? Actually run a non-mainstream OS. That shouldn't be hard for most of the visitors of this website, shouldn't it?

    Indeed. I've actually been a little disappointed with the DRM on CDs. When I put them in my Linux boxes they just play. I can rip to MP3 until the cows come home. No problem.

    I actually wanted one to fail so I could see how it was failing and maybe do something about it. Contribute something to the community, ya know.

    ...laura, not a U.S. resident, not covered by the DMCA

  32. iTunes Australia and Japan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Sony still hasn't agreed to come on board with iTunes, which I find damn annoying. Everytime I search for an artist and don't find them (considering they're a big artist), I go and search for that artists publisher.. and what do ya know, always sony.

    I'm really starting to hate that company. This BS "DRM" is just the icing on the cake. Sure, iTunes has DRM, but it's quite benign (5 computers, unlimited ipods, unlimited burns per song, 7 burns per album).

    They're too big, and have their hands in too many pots. Time for Sony artists to take a stand and go with somebody else (quite difficult, considering the ass-raping contracts they probably had to sign). Essentially, Sony are denying their artists a source of income to satisfy the needs of their consumer electronics department. I'd be pissed.

  33. the big guys take punches like candy... by DigitalEntropy · · Score: 5, Interesting

    ... the little guys are more likely to crumble. Why not target the source of this crap? I did. Though, admittedly I'm sure SONY keeps their wallets fat enough to ignore us. See below:

    ===

    Mail-To: info@xcp-aurora.com, info@first4internet.co.uk

    Subject: attn: Mathew, Tony, Peter, Nick; re: Extreme displeasure with your XCP product.

    To Whom it may concern:

    I would like to address the outstanding issue regarding the software your company licensed to SONY BMG here in the United States. This software proposes to be a harmless DRM solution for the corporate customer as a method of protection against malicious users. However, what your software critically FAILS at is conscientiously protecting the end user against exploits of your poorly, shit-house written utilities.
    Personally, I'm glad that your nasty parlour tricks were recently exposed by SysInternals.com (http://www.sysinternals.com/blog/2005/10/sony-roo tkits-and-digital-rights.html) for the disreputable practices they are, and for identifying "First 4 Internet" (sounds like a shoddy store-front operation for a bunch of Black Hat rejects) as the company directly responsible for the most vile intrusion my system has ever received. And the fact that your ill-conceived product leaves my system open to additional intrusions of this nature is unforgivable.
    May whatever sink-hole from whence you rose quickly swallow you back. You have no right to voilate my computer's integrity. You have no right to scan the contents of my computer. You may have the right to hide in the darkness of Windows' subsystem like cowards, but that does not mean you won't be seen. You have no right to abuse the trust garnered by SONY from the citizens it regularly calls customers (or, perhaps more appropriately, "guinea pigs"). I hope the light of truth sends you roaches scurrying.

    With the wretched taste of bile at the back of my throat,

    [my name]
    [my email addy]

    ===

    Personally, I purchased "The Dead 60s" latest album, and sure enough it had the exact same copy-protection crap as described on sysinternals.com. That article sure shed some light on the behavioral difference in my system since I got that CD (significantly slower start up and execution times on a 1.2 GHz, and constant 5 - 10% CPU usage with almost nothing running). Fuck them. Fuck them right in the ear.

    It was stated before, and I'll reinforce it: This kind of DRM ADVOCATES piracy. You are safer without DRM. I intend to zap my Windows machine and go to Debian (as I've been considering, but now have good reason for security purposes), and return this CD by mail to SONY BMG in a thousand tiny pieces, but not before I copy it and distribute out of sheer spite.

    --

    Thank you for reading One Man's Opinion. No participation necessary. Offer void where deemed by law or PATRIOT Act.
  34. Sony is flirting with trouble... by TiggertheMad · · Score: 5, Interesting

    They don't put it there. You do. They just packaged it for you. If you didn't want to give them permission to run arbitrary executables on your computer, then WHY DID YOU RUN THEIR EXECUTABLE??

    IANAL, however, I believe that contracts that are made in bad faith, or with the intent to decieve a particpant are not binding. If this is the case, I think that I wouldn't be hard to argue in a court that you have no obligation to keep Sony's rootkit (by deffinition an illicit and deceptive tool) on your computer. Moreover, you might also be entitled to damages resulting from said 'bad faith' agreement.

    Even if my assessment isn't quite correct, it seems to me that it is probably fuzzy enough of a point to invite litigation. If I were a multimillion(billion?) dollar company I wouldn't be the one to test the legal water on something like this.

    --

    HA! I just wasted some of your bandwidth with a frivolous sig!
  35. You just helped with my PSP/PS3 decision by Bodhammer · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Sony, you have gone too far...

    No PSP for Christmas!

    No PS3 next year!

    So you protected a $15 CD by killing ~$700 of hardware purchases plus whatever games I would have purchased.

    No wonder your stock sucks and your revenues are down!

    Your DRM works, I'm exercising my right not to purchase your products any more!

    --
    "I say we take off, nuke the site from orbit. It's the only way to be sure."
  36. Well, well, well... by RoffleTheWaffle · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Cat's out of the bag now. Congratulations, Sony. You fucked up big time.

    I'd like to take this opportunity to dissect the article in question here, to point out just how positively obscene this is. There are a few key points I'd like to highlight that I feel we should all take into consideration.

    It would appear that Sony has deliberately begun shipping rootkits with its DRM protected CDs. According to the article - and this is a pretty good definition, by the way - "Rootkits are cloaking technologies that hide files, Registry keys, and other system objects from diagnostic and security software, and they are usually employed by malware attempting to keep their implementation hidden." In a nutshell, this means that the program shipped with the CD in question here - and possibly other Sony CDs - is designed to hide itself and other programs from view. In other words, once installed, it will allow Sony and any other interested party familiar with this particular rootkit to operate programs on a compromised system without the user knowing it.

    Let's take a step back here to consider the implications of this. Sony is distributing a rootkit, but what does this have to do with DRM? Well, if you really think about it, it has everything to do with DRM. A DRM program that cannot be seen or easily accessed can operate secretly, monitoring and manipulating the system behind the user's back. Any future DRM software Sony distributes could infiltrate a computer secretly, and burrow deep into the system files of said computer.

    According to the article, the rootkit was produced by First 4 Internet. Upon investigating the company itself and the products and services it offers, the author dredged up this lovely little nugget of joy: "... However, the fact that the company sells a technology called XCP made me think that maybe the files I'd found were part of some content protection scheme. I Googled the company name and came across this article, confirming the fact that they have deals with several record companies, including Sony, to implement Digital Rights Management (DRM) software for CDs." That right there should be proof enough that this is no accident, and anything but legitimate DRM. Not only does having a rootkit handy make the DRM difficult to thwart, but also allows it to operate secretly.

    Now, you'd think that you could just remove this software, right? Wrong. Dead wrong, as a matter of fact. The author of the article had a hell of a time removing the rootkit, actually, and not only that, at any given time, it was consuming between one and two percent of the CPU's power - a small 'penalty' for even having it. (And any programs it's hiding would also have to leech off the CPU and RAM as well.) As he attempted to remove this shit, he discovered even more about the software: "As I was deleting the driver Registry keys under HKLM\System\CurrentControlSet\Services I noted that they were either configured as boot-start drivers or members of groups listed by name in the HKLM\System\CurrentControlSet\SafeBoot subkeys, which means that they load even in Safe Mode, making system recovery extremely difficult if any of them have a bug that prevents the system from booting." Suddenly, this is more than a performance issue. This software could theoretically disable a system should it break or be manipulated by the software it's hiding. It would appear, however, it is possible to remove, but only after eviscerating a handful of driver files, registry entries and keys, and other lovely goodies from your system. The rootkit and the DRM attached to it do not have an uninstaller, and unless you take the same steps the author took to remove this flaming pile of garbage from your system... Well, he puts it pretty well:

    "The entire experience was frustrating and irritating. Not only had Sony put software on my system that uses techniques commonly used by malware to mask its presence, the software is poorly written and provides no means for uninstall. Worse, most users that stumble across the cloaked files wit

  37. Re:Alternative OS users by Tony+Hoyle · · Score: 4, Insightful

    What we *can* do is write a detector (only takes one of use) and hopefully a remover. Distribute it widely. Make it plain where this malware came from too... the non-technical will soon understand that playing a Sony CD will break their computer - that's all the knowledge they need.

  38. this is illegal under Minnesota law by swschrad · · Score: 4, Interesting

    it's a 5/$5000 penalty, class C felony, to knowingly distribute harmful software to a PC in Minnesota. 1992 law, I believe it was. demonstrating this is a rootkit is prima facie evidence that this would be harmful software.

    somebody with means should get a case opened....

    --
    if this is supposed to be a new economy, how come they still want my old fashioned money?
  39. Legal Precedent in other forms by istartedi · · Score: 4, Funny

    If I kill you to prevent you from killing me, killing you is self defense and not a crime. Seems reasonable that if I kill Sony's process to prevent it from stealing my ID that it's self defense and not a crime. The DMCA is one of those laws that is so out of whack, nevermind the US Constitution. It probably violates Brittish common law, the Magna Carta, and if you look hard enough it probably violates the code of Hammurabai and the social order of primitive hunter-gatherer cultures too.

    --
    For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
  40. Damn, I thought I was first by muzzy · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I thought I was ahead of time, when I implemented a rootkit DRM just a few days ago. My rootkit is a part of my project, trying to show how malware and DRM systems can get really close to each others, and both get protected by law. Under EU Copyright Directive, it's going to be illegal to remove this rootkit.

    You can read about my copyright projects here:
    http://muzzy.net/files/copyright_projects_en.txt

    --
    -- Matti Nikki
  41. What a bunch of losers by cdrguru · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Let's review here: someone has found a publicly distributed driver that when properly installed on Windows hides files and folders. It may have some additional and yet unknown functionality and may be coupled with a driver which, under the right circumstances, disables access to a CD drive.

    Sony is distributing this as part of some larger, possibly effective DRM system for music CDs.

    What I see here is an endless amount of whining about how awful this is. You are overlooking the potential of this. The key here is that this is now out in the wild and can be exploited. The contest should be to come up with creative (and possibly destructive) things to do with these drivers when packaged with other software.

    The result of this should be interesting. I think the responsiblity for all of this rests with Sony and First 4 Internet, but I would really like to see something creative done with this, such as an ActiveX control that disables the CD drive of anyone who visits a web site. The point is to make as much use of this as possible. Sony has provided the tool, it is now up to everyone to make as much use of this as possible.

  42. This is GREAT! by thetaco82 · · Score: 4, Funny

    So you're telling me that if I prepend a file name with "$sys$" it will be nearly undetectable? Finally! An easy and effective way to hide my pr0n. I can't wait to buy this CD

  43. _WHAT_ EULA?!?! by mrchaotica · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It's SUPPOSED to be a fucking AUDIO CD!!

    --

    "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz