Slashdot Mirror
AACS Revision Cracked A Week Before Release
stevedcc writes "Ars Technica is running a story about next week's release of AACS, which is intended to fix the currently compromised version. The only problem is, the patched version has already been cracked. From the article: 'AACS LA's attempts to stifle dissemination of AACS keys and prevent hackers from compromising new keys are obviously meeting with extremely limited success. The hacker collective continues to adapt to AACS revisions and is demonstrating a capacity to assimilate new volume keys at a rate which truly reveals the futility of resistance. If keys can be compromised before HD DVDs bearing those keys are even released into the wild, one has to question the viability of the entire key revocation model.'"
If they put this much effort into making crappy movies not suck instead, they'd save a lot more money than trying to control every customer's lives
Google's Super Secret Search Algorithm: SELECT @search_results FROM internet WHERE @search_results = 'good'
...I'm sure someone will solve the problem by writing more laws.
That's always the solution, isn't it?
(oy.)
A cheerful little bird is sitting here singing.
You mean "failure"?
Remember, kids: It's not torture, it's "enhanced interrogation techniques".
The article is missing the key, who's got it? I need to start a protest on digg!
The Farewell Tour II
This is quickly making DRM look less like rights management and more like digital restrictions mockery. Of course, we knew this from the start. Any security strategy that depends on giving the attacker both the key and lock is doomed to fail.
The guys who make this DRM know its flawed but they still get paid when it fails. They must be quietly laughing all the way to the bank. Yet like morons the record labels keep handing money over. It's no wonder CD sales are declining when you're *that* clue-proof.
EMI has the right idea. Shock horror, if you give the customer what they want, they'll pay you for it. I never would have guessed!
Simon
Sounds like the old days of the C64 boards. It started with 1day warez, soon there were 0day warez, before it was all done there were boards that only accepted -7day warez. That was warez (Cracked software) that were released no later than 7 days before the program was to hit the market!
Give up now and stop waisting money on something that will never work!
That's the dumbest fucking idea I've heard since I've been at Microsoft.
How is this economical for these companies? It should be simple:
ProfitA = $MEDIA_INCOME - DRM R&D - DRM content - lawsuits - alienated customers - recalls (i.e. rootkit)
ProfitB = $MEDIA_INCOME - piracy loss
I would bet that ProfitB is significantly larger then ProfitA.
To which they replied, "Foolish boy, that was just a vapid and insincere corporate slogan designed to sound vaguely cool to wannabe-rebellious (and utterly conformist) 13-year-olds..."
My mistake.
"Slashdot - News and Chat Sites Deviant". (Click "homepage" link above for details).
Sad, I read this whole comment and the only thing I'll remember is "actress having sex on the beach".
Yes it's an anecdote! Were you expecting original research in a Slashdot comment?
Funny. I just did it. Of course, my file is compressed -- the decompression program takes FOREVER, but it's pretty easy to tell it to skip to the Nth entry.
I never understood the MPAA/RIAA's approach to curbing piracy and increasing legitimate sales by imposing restrictions on those who pay for content. Think about it: a pirated album or movie comes with zero DRM and thus can be used for any purpose on any player an unlimited number of times. If I pay for that same album and purchase it through iTunes, I can only listen to it on my computer and my iPod. So here's my choice: pay for restricted content or download DRM-free content FOR free. Umm, who in their right mind would elect for the former?
A more proactive approach to curbing piracy would not restrict the rights of the consumer, but expand them. Instead of pouring millions of dollars into encryption schemes that are cracked before they're released, invest that money into innovations like exclusive or pre-release content for paying customers. I might feel better about buying an album online if a) I knew I could use that album any way I want and b) got a little extra in return, like an interview with the band, an exclusive track, preferential treatment for concert tickets, or whatever. I know these exclusive tracks and interviews could just as easily be pirated, but it's the thought that counts. If you (the RIAA/MPAA) respect my right and desire to use my movies and music how I want, I'll be more likely to respect your right to compensation for said goods. Either way, putting digital handcuffs on your paying customers is definitely *not* the right approach.
More likely the other way around: the people who actually care about the art will let anybody experience it, while the people who only care for money will charge unnecessary costs.
Please, for the good of Humanity, vote Obama.