Slashdot Mirror
Intel Threatens DMCA Using HDCP Crack
mikesd81 writes "Intel is apparently threatening to use the DMCA against anyone using the HDCP crack under the DMCA's anti-circumvention clause. 'There are laws to protect both the intellectual property involved as well as the content that is created and owned by the content providers,' said Tom Waldrop, a spokesman for the company, which developed HDCP. 'Should a circumvention device be created using this information, we and others would avail ourselves, as appropriate, of those remedies.'"
You know hackers will win anyway.
After the horse has left the barn it's too late to close the door.
With DMCA hell I could protect something with 2 bit encryption. There is only two keys. 1 and 0. Pretty easy to crack right? It doesn't really matter. No matter how easy to crack doing so opens you up to the DMCA.
If they win expect more "paper tiger" encryption and content protection systems. The teeth isn't the weak flawed crypto. The teeth is in the lawsuit potential.
Maybe I won`t use Intel....
So good luck with that Intel...
Listen to my latest album here
You've found a foolproof way to protect your obsolescent DRM. After all, it worked so well for DVD/CSS.
What about those people in countries that don't have a DMCA, don't have software patents and have "interoperability" clauses in most things?
Can't I just buy my HDCP stripper from them, instead? Fortunately, that tends to be the same countries that make lots of cheap electronics. Surprising, that, isn't it?
(Not that I care - I don't own a single piece of HD equipment, and don't feel like I'm missing out either)
Who wrote the headline? Shouldn't it be "Intel Threatens HDCP Crack Using DMCA"?
So if the Library of Congress says jail-breaking is okay, and the DMCA says it's not, which one takes precedence in U.S. law?
(You do not need to point out that this is Slashdot, not a legal firm. I do not expect all responses to be from lawyers. I will not take any responses to be authoritative. Heretofore therefore nonesuch nevertheless notwithstanding and yadda yadda.)
If I understand this correctly, the BD encryption has NOT been cracked. THIS hack only opens the communication over the HDMI cable between the BD player and your TV. Cracking the encryption on the BD disks themselves is another matter that has not yet been fully cracked. However, this exploit should allow reading the digital data flowing out of the BD player to be captured and saved to disk. This might require some hardware hacking, I don't think there are any PCI video cards that have HDMI INPUTS available.
Even if China or someother NON-DMCA country builds such devices they will (eventually) be destroyed by customs and whoever smuggles them into this country will be treated the same as a drug dealer.
Well, no. But the legal proceedings against him (or more rightly, customers using his work-around) were costly: at least 3 million people dead.
Let's hope Intel shows a little more restraint than that.
Just use an FPGA... problem solved.
The OpenGraphics project are building a graphics card with a big-ass FPGA on it. Seems like the right tool in the right place...
Slashdot - News for Nerds, Stuff that Matters, in ISO-8859-1 Has just realised that beta makes this signature redundant
if you are talking about luther, he started a major offshoot of the christian faith, sending wars across europe destroying many catholic churches and killing thousands (even very recently in north ireland)
sounds like a plan to me, burning record stores, MPAA/RIAA executives crusified or burned at the stake.. where do i sign up?
People, what a bunch of bastards
The village people?
Unlike DRM which is present within media upon its receipt, HDCP does not exist on a BluRay or cable/satellite TV transmission. HDCP is something that is added by the user's machine. DMCA says:
And since we're talking about a process/treatment that occurs after access, it's not something that is needed to gain access.
Just an idea. (Probably won't work.)
Another tack here, is: how easily can you tell your equipment to use HDCP even when it's not playing DRMed media? Can you have your computer use a HDCP connection to its monitor all the time even when you're surfing Slashdot, typing your great novel, etc. Is this something that is happening all the time, anyway? (I just don't know.) If so -- if non-DRM-colluders can enable HDCP -- then 99.999999% of the time that someone uses a HDCP cracker, they would not be doing to circumvent a technological measure that controls access to a work without the authority of the copyright holder, since the user is the copyright holder. Likewise, the intended market and primary use of such a device, would not be to remove HDCP without the authority of the copyright holder. It would be legal to use and traffick.
(This is why there can never be a real standard for DRM, because you have to prevent non-colluding parties from being allowed to apply that DRM, lest they authorize access.) Cracking HDCP and distributing cracks, is only prohibited if HDCP is normally only used when a copyright holder demands it.
As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
Upload it to their completely legal hardware HDMI converter that doesn't decrypt HDCP and has a very easy to write firmware upgrade system.
bd is breakable (slysoft.com) and so who cares about BD anymore.
but for the mythtv guys who want to timeshift cable (non-clear qam) or sat-tv, you really only have hdmi now. the s-video is a joke and they won't give you component since its analog and is a 'hole' (lol).
if the hdmi sniffers/importers start hitting the shelves, that would enable us mythtv guys to FINALLY consider coming back to pay-tv again.
this could be a GOOD thing for the content guys. right? RIGHT??
of course they'll never see it that way. I currently don't have a pay-tv sub and have let mine lapse for a few years, now. my myth-tv setup only picks up OTA and what is tunable by my hdhomerun box. if, though, it was possible to easily import the hdmi/dvi streams from the cable boxes, that would actually put the pay-tv back into consideration again.
if I can't record it to MY system, I don't want it. but let me timeshift my way and I can open my wallet.
intel and the rest of the industry: hear me, please. I'm a revenue stream that you refuse to tap because of your silliness.
--
"It is now safe to switch off your computer."
Remember that the only reason these devices have DRM is because the content producers want it and consumers will tolerate or in most cases not notice it. The electronics industry has no particular stake in this, other than to sell the most devices. They don't care what the devices do so long as people buy them.
So when HDMI was created, Intel put in copy protection because they knew it would help market the thing. If it was unprotected, the media industry might balk at putting content out on any device that had it. Status quo with old devices would be maintained, electronics industry doesn't make more money. They also knew it would be almost a total non-issue to most consumers. While there were some early adopters that got fucked, or people doing something fairly non-standard, most people aren't even aware of HDCP since more or less all HDMI devices have it. You switch to the new connector and that is it.
This also works because people are moving to a new format anyhow. They are replacing old NTSC TVs with new ATSC TVs. They want the new electronics for the features, they don't stop anything they already have from working, etc. Content producers are happy, consumers are happy, the electronics industry is happy.
Well the problem with something new, if you tried to mandate it, is that people wouldn't buy it. You roll out HDCPv2 on new Blu-ray players. They don't work with your HDCPv1 TV. People will not want these players. They'll buy one, it won't work, they'll take it back. Well stores aren't going to be interested in stocking something like that. Because of that, electronics companies won't make something like that. Also because of that, content producers will be forced to support older HDCPv1 devices to make any money.
You can offer up a completely new format with new restrictions to consumers, but it has to be something they like to bite. As an example of a failure look at DVD-Audio. The idea was to increase the fidelity of audio, but also to get some copyprotection. It features CPPM, which is better than CSS and of course way better than the nothing CDs feature. Problem is that they couldn't move it. Only audiophiles bought the hardware so even though the content industry liked it, they had to keep making CDs, and in fact very few DVD-As were made.
So a new DRM could potentially come out with a new connector and format, but it has to be something you can convince people they want to buy. Just trying to say "Nope, you need HDCPv2 now," would do nothing. Nobody would buy it, since it would work less well than the HDCPv1 stuff on the market.
sounds like a plan to me, burning record stores, MPAA/RIAA executives crusified or burned at the stake.. where do i sign up?
I think you've misidentified who the establishment was and who died. It's far more likely you'll be burned as a copywitch than the other way around.
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
The DMCA allows for reverse-engineering for interoperability. So, eat a dick Intel.
No sig for you!!
There are already chips out there that can do HDMI with HDCP (e.g. Analog Devices AD9393) if you supply a key.
So it should be a matter of using one of these plus a key derived from this intel master key.
You obviously don't need them. All you have to do it say "it's illegal."