Slashdot Mirror
Censoring a Number
Rudd-O writes "Months after successful discovery of the HD-DVD processing key, an unprecedented campaign of censorship, in the form of DMCA takedown notices by the MPAA, has hit the Net. For example Spooky Action at a Distance was killed. More disturbingly, my story got Dugg twice, with the second wave hitting 15,500 votes, and today I found out it had simply disappeared from Digg. How long until the long arm of the MPAA gets to my own site (run in Ecuador) and the rest of them holding the processing key? How long will we let rampant censorship go on, in the name of economic interest?" How long before the magic 16-hex-pairs number shows up in a comment here?
09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
I was amazed at the quickness of the censors, when I clicked on the link here, and got the "Nothing to see here, please move along." message. I've often seen people say that they got that message, but was never quite sure if it actually happened. This time it did. In cooperation with the summary, here's the number: 09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
warning: This post is likely to contain gobs of dripping sarcasm. Consume at your own risk.
http://www.google.com/search?q=%2209+F9+11+02+9D+7 4+E3+5B+D8+41+56+C5+63+56+88+C0%22
Causation can cause correlation
Time to get out and use the old pen to write a nice little letter to my congress critter.
I'm all for someone using their rights to protect what is their's. Not a problem, but when it dictates what they can do with the things they own, and speech, I think it has crossed a line I'd rather it not cross.
Some say Americans just take the abuse and can't see what the big deal is, unless it might cause re-runs of Friends to be pulled. Some people say Americans are sheep and will go where a select class of people point for them to go. I have sometimes seen these rights dry up a little when not constantly defended, and I start to think American's are lemmings, not sheep.
I guess I'm just as guilty as everyone else. I'm no fool. I can see I'm like that also, but I'm trying really hard to be different.
Short Answer: It all stops when we all stop it.
-- Prepared at the direction of, or to be sent to Legal Counsel, in anticipation of litigation. Attorney Client Pri
04 08 15 16 23 42
09
Oh nine, eff nine, one one oh too!
Nine dee, seven four, eee three, five bee.
Dee ate for one,
Five six,
See five,
Six three, five six, ate eight sea oh!
The media processing key for AACS is: 09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
Schwab
Editor, A1-AAA AmeriCaptions
The score so far:
Posts mentioning the infamous hex 09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0: 25
Posts remarking how they have the same number as their luggage combination: 5
Stay tuned, folks, the game ain't over yet!
09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
When I read this slashdot post, the first thing I thought was "I bet there's a wikipedia article on it!" Sure enough, either somebody has posted one and it's been deleted and protected, or the editors went ahead and jumped on it and protected it. (I haven't checked yet, though there are "additional information links. Nor have I check it in other bases.)
Guess I should look into postng this to one of the "anti-censorship on wikipeida" sites.
For what it's worth, this is utter crap, but it shows a severe weakness in copyright law. Anything that can be represented with data, anything at all, can be encoded/encrpyted on anything else, given an arbitrary coding mechanism. For instance, let us create "sabre86's stanard coding scheme": add 1 to any number. After encoding we have 09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C1. Look, it's a different number! I guess it isn't a circumvention. Or is it?
You can extend this logic arbitarily to anything, so that not only can any string represent any other string (and thus be a "copy"), any string can be the key to an encoding scheme, meaning that posting any string is "circumvention" if I see fit to describe my encryption process such that it encrypts/encodes a copyrighted work using that string as a "key."
So all strings are copyrighted because they can derived from other copyrighted strings through an arbitrary encoding scheme and all strings are potentially circumventions of DRM/CRAP because they are both a representation of a known key in a different encoding and the key for some other arbitrary encryption algorithm that "circumvents the copyright protections."
Bullshit
--sabre86
If ever a story deserved to be tagged hex09f911029d74e35bd84156c5635688c0 then it's this one. Remember, your tag must start with an alphabetical character, and it takes a lot more tagging than it used to to get up there in lights.
Look at old posts. I've been using that exact sequence of hex digits as my signature on posts since the beginning.
I'm sorry, but you can't claim Copyright on a randomly generated cryptographic key. That is because a randomly generated key does not meet the minimum creativity requirements of Copyright law. No creative input == No Copyright. The bar is very low but a randomly generated key patently does not meet it.
Astonishingly, the next prime after that is only 31 away, so our famous number can also be represented as
It is also very interesting because it is also equal to the product of the following prime numbers:
Truthfully, when was the last time you saw any remotely similar number? Never, right? We better record this for mathematical posterity!!! :-)
Professional Wild-Eyed Visionary
A novel way of saying it.
add hl,bc
ld sp,hl
ld de,09d02h
ld (hl),h
ex (sp),hl
ld e,e
ret c
ld b,c
ld d,(hl)
push bc
ld h,e
ld d,(hl)
adc a,b
ret nz
Oolite: Elite-like game. For Mac, Linux and Windows
Wow, it really works!
One problem though, I used it to watch attack of the clones, hoping to see some Natalie Portman hawtness, and was instead rendered impotent by Ewan McGregor and Hayden Christensen.
Turns out, the key only works for actors, and does nothing for actresses.
Try not to take me more seriously than I take myself.
Right here is the T-Shirt.
A blog about stuff.
Maybe companies should understand that secure encryption is impossible when you have several thousand geeks running around with a computer, no social skills, and way too much idle time on their hands.
Tesla was a genius. Edison however was a overrated hack who liked to torture puppies.
The mere fact that geeks regularly cooperate on a massive scale (i'd hazard the only people who cooperate on a larger scale are organised religions) illustrates that we do not lack the social skills necessary for our society.
I'd like to see this on the next start sequence of the Simpsons! Bart writing on the blackboard:
...
I must not write 09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
I must not write 09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
I must not write 09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
I must not write 09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
If they're so upset about people saying what the processing key is, then surely they'd have no problem with saying what it's not.
-- Alastair
For extra fun, you can put the number in your user agent string. Since plenty of server logs are public, the number will be in lots of log files all over the place.
In Firefox, you can append a comment to the default existing user-agent string, by visiting about:config and adding a string property with the key general.useragent.extra.firefoxComment
Whatever you put in there is added to the end of the user agent string that is sent with every request your browser makes. Mine is now:
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.8.1.3) Gecko/20070426 Firefox/2.0.0.3 Version 13,256,278,887,989,457,651,018,865,901,401,704,640
Thanks to ludwik on digg for the suggestion.