Pirates Crack Microsoft's UWP Protection, Five Layers of DRM Defeated (torrentfreak.com)

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Pirates Crack Microsoft's UWP Protection, Five Layers of DRM Defeated (torrentfreak.com)

Posted by msmash on Saturday February 17, 2018 @04:00AM from the challenge-accepted dept.

A piracy scene group has managed to get past the five layers of DRM in Microsoft's Unified Windows Platform UWP -- which enables software developers to create applications that can run across many devices. From a report: This week it became clear that the UWP system, previously believed to be uncrackable, had fallen to pirates. After being released on October 31, 2017, the somewhat underwhelming Zoo Tycoon Ultimate Animal Collection became the first victim at the hands of popular scene group, CODEX. "This is the first scene release of a UWP (Universal Windows Platform) game. Therefore we would like to point out that it will of course only work on Windows 10. This particular game requires Windows 10 version 1607 or newer," the group said in its release notes. CODEX says it's important that the game isn't allowed to communicate with the Internet so the group advises users to block the game's executable in their firewall.

80 of 138 comments (clear)

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Congratulations! by Anonymous Coward · 2018-02-17 04:03 · Score: 5, Insightful

Kudos to CODEX for this impressive feat! They are a living reminder that hard work, diligence, and persistence will ultimately lead to success!
1. Re:Congratulations! by thegarbz · 2018-02-18 03:36 · Score: 1
  
  No damn these filthy pirates. They should end up in a special kind of hell made of my little ponies for subjecting the world to Zoo Tycoon Ultimate Animals Collection. This cracking of DRM proves once and for all there is no God.
"Uncracakble"? by drunken_boxer777 · 2018-02-17 04:05 · Score: 5, Funny

previously believed to be uncrackable
By whom?
You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
1. Re:"Uncracakble"? by FatdogHaiku · 2018-02-17 04:29 · Score: 1
  
  I just wish they would get a different term for the people doing the work...
  Every time I see or hear "Pirates Crack blah blah blah" I have this image of Johnny Depp lurching drunkenly around a bunch of hardware with a flagon of grog, exhorting his companions on to greater depths of digital skullduggery...
  
  --
  You have the right to remain sentient. If you give up the right to remain sentient, you will be elected to public office
2. Re:"Uncracakble"? by Opportunist · 2018-02-17 04:40 · Score: 3, Funny
  
  By the MS marketing department.
  Duh.
  
  --
  We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
3. Re:"Uncracakble"? by Anonymous Coward · 2018-02-17 05:40 · Score: 1
  
  Really?
  Every time I hear it, I think of Boris.
4. Re:"Uncracakble"? by alvinrod · 2018-02-17 05:50 · Score: 2
  
  I think the act of marketing it as uncrackable just attracts the attention of the kind of people looking for a good challenge.
  
  If I had to make and market my own DRM I'd brand it as "some weak shit that a five year old could probably break in under ten minutes and totally not worth anyone's actual time due to being so trivial and beneath your abilities." Who's going to try seeking out any glory from cracking that?
5. Re:"Uncracakble"? by Vastad · 2018-02-18 05:29 · Score: 1
  
  They probably watched Hugh Jackman "hacking" in Swordfish.
  The scene makes me want to inflict pain of cute fluffy creatures. You can tell Hugh has never been a techy person ever. He probably never even knew what a computer looked like until he showed up on set. Then he rented Hackers, watched it, and acted and interpretation of it (badly).
6. Re:"Uncracakble"? by Vastad · 2018-02-18 05:30 · Score: 1
  
  Oh god, I apologize for crappy typos.
7. Re:"Uncracakble"? by phoenix_rizzen · 2018-02-19 11:25 · Score: 1
  
  4-6 year olds the world over?
Effort by alvinrod · 2018-02-17 04:14 · Score: 3, Insightful

I wonder how much human effort is devoted to both construction and circumvention of DRM schemes. We've seen time and time again that it doesn't work and is ultimately defeated rendering the entire exercise ultimately futile, and yet so few seemingly try to do otherwise. If all of that effort were put to some other use, I'm curious about what could be accomplished. The individuals who work on this stuff on either side must be some incredibly intelligent people to do what they do, so I suspect their talents are utterly wasted on something as pointless as this.
1. Re:Effort by maestroX · 2018-02-17 04:35 · Score: 1
  
  That pretty much counts for anything in the world, I mean eye of the beholder. As long as there's money to be made, it's useful.
2. Re: Effort by Sarten-X · 2018-02-17 04:51 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  This is pretty much dead-on correct. Sorry, folks, but we live in a capitalist society. You aren't entitled to anything just by right of being able to copy, take, or otherwise acquire it.
  If you can't afford (or don't want to pay for) some piece of software, don't use it. It's that simple. In many cases there are FLOSS alternatives that will do the job (perhaps not as easily or effectively, but well enough to pass muster), or especially in the case of games, the software itself is a luxury that you can simply do without. I'm terribly sorry if you feel you just can't live without your Zoo Tycoon Ultimate Animal Collection, but that's the way the world works. You don't get to cheat and get off scot-free.
  
  --
  You do not have a moral or legal right to do absolutely anything you want.
3. Re:Effort by Anonymous Coward · 2018-02-17 04:56 · Score: 1
  
  The problem with your reasoning is that you start from the wrong assumption ("DRM does not work").
  By any practical sense of success, DRM is working very well. Yes, someone, somewhere will crack any DRM eventually. So what? Who cares? What matters to Microsoft (or any other company) is not unhackablity, but the bottom line, and the bottom line is:
  * 99% of users will never hear of this hack. MS and other companies using DRM will make a lot of money out of those, more money than had DRM not existed.
  * Most of the users that will hear of it, do not know how to adjust firewall settings. MS will make a lot of money...
  * DRM will be patched again, at which point it will eventually be hacked again. This cost is much lower than the profits.
  In short, the current status quo of mostly working DRM is perfectly fine for companies, arguably even a better state for them than "perfectly 100% working all the time forever DRM".
4. Re: Effort by alvinrod · 2018-02-17 04:57 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  I don't necessarily buy that argument. There are plenty of games that I could just go out and pirate, but websites like GOG (make it easy for me to buy those games instead. It's mostly a lot of older games that have run their course, but newer titles like those in the Witcher series or some of Obsidian's newer releases have been made available there on release without any DRM and those companies are managing to be financially successful.
  
  At some point, you probably start spending more on DRM than you gain by through sales that are lost to piracy. I suspect that a lot of piracy of software is done because it's the most convenient way to consume or in some cases the only way to consume. If you're not providing a legal way for digital distribution to occur in some countries, it's little surprise that willing consumers will revert to pirate copies. The other side comes down to economics. You can't sell a $60 game or a $20 movie into a market where those values constitute a monthly wage. Piracy in those territories does not represent a lost sale because it could never have been on to begin with. If you want to sell into those markets, you need to drop prices to a few dollars and it's very likely that you'll get some paying customers.
  
  If you spend $200,000 on developing, implementing, and supporting (you know, when it invariably fucks over a paying customer and they're calling tech support) DRM, but the inclusion only generates an extra $50,000 in revenue then it's a waste. Everyone wants to believe that they're potentially losing millions, but it's clearly not that much. If you use Hollywood's figures for piracy the amount comes out to something larger than the GDP of the entire planet, which should tell you how baseless the calculations are.
5. Re: Effort by DontBeAMoran · 2018-02-17 05:24 · Score: 1
  
  Joke's on him, you can't pirate Linux.
  Also, Ballmer is long gone from Microsoft, try to keep up.
  
  --
  #DeleteFacebook
6. Re:Effort by DontBeAMoran · 2018-02-17 05:27 · Score: 1
  
  There's also the period of time before a crack is discovered. Between the game launch and that time, a lot of people will have no choice but to pay for the game they want to play.
  
  --
  #DeleteFacebook
7. Re: Effort by smallfries · 2018-02-17 05:51 · Score: 4, Interesting
  
  What complete bullshit. Just because laws governing the copyright of software have been bought and paid for does not mean that we must obey them.
  Pragmatically: take whatever software you want because there is no ideal drm scheme that can stop you.
  Ethically: go for it, software is simply an expression of knowledge and copying it does no harm.
  There is no scarity in digital goods other than that we bind ourselves into, so why not go for it.
  (I say this as a programmer)
  
  --
  Slashdot: where don knuth is an idiot because he cant grasp the awesome power of php
8. Re: Effort by Kjella · 2018-02-17 06:01 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  This is pretty much dead-on correct. Sorry, folks, but we live in a capitalist society.
  Funny you should say that since DRM is the jack-booted thug enforcing licenses which is a war on ownership and exactly the opposite of traditional capitalism. What we're heading for is more like modern serfdom where you own nothing and license all your software and media subject to the whims of global mega-corporations who decides when they're altering the terms and when your rented experience expires and whether you've violated some sort of rule in that 100-page EULA you didn't read. And with IoT and self-driving cars on the horizon that concept will probably soon be extended to hardware too. Sure you can always say no... in which case you get no security updates and/or everything stops working, it's not like you have a real choice. The "buying and selling" model is on the way out...
  
  --
  Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
9. Re:Effort by Solandri · 2018-02-17 08:35 · Score: 1
  
  If it would take more effort to convince managers/owners/IP holders that DRM is pointless, then going ahead and implementing DRM, then circumventing it is actually the more cost-effective approach.
  
  The assumption that if we didn't use DRM, everything else would be the the same except there would be no DRM, is based on a misunderstanding (non-understanding) of opportunity cost. You have to compare to the nearest viable alternative, not some idealized utopian fantasy (e.g. Congress bans DRM).. So in this case the alternative is probably managers/owners/IP holders try to implement some other crazy scheme to protect their work, which may in fact end up being more costly to circumvent.
10. Re: Effort by mohsel · 2018-02-17 09:49 · Score: 1
  
  Don't have mod points, but I totally agree with you on the usage of alternative software. there is no absolute necessity that is digital. oxygen and food aren't digital and taking other's intellectual effort is not fair in my opinion.
  
  However the problem for me is in security research, if i buy digital product from you i wanna be sure that the thing does exactly what it says it does, and nothing else, i don't wanna buy (be proprietary an instance of the stuff in exchange of money) something that does stuff (collect information and communicate with the outside word) without my knowledge and explicit consent. that is the biggest problem and until they find an impartial, competent, trustworthy third party that can verify the integrity of software and hardware, security research, cracking and reverse engineering by individuals should be justified and legitimate in my personal view.
11. Re: Effort by Kurrelgyre · 2018-02-17 19:20 · Score: 2
  
  Even if it's digital and an expression of knowledge that costs nothing to copy, if the person who created it doesn't want you to have it, you shouldn't get to have it. And if you do somehow acquire it, you shouldn't be smug enough about the whole thing to think you're somehow in the right.
  You don't get to decide what other people do with their stuff.
12. Re: Effort by smallfries · 2018-02-17 22:16 · Score: 1
  
  But an idea does not belong to a person.
  Everything that you wrote flows from this basic fallacy. Ownership works as a model for allocarion of scarse resources. It is fundamentally broken as a model for infornation.
  
  --
  Slashdot: where don knuth is an idiot because he cant grasp the awesome power of php
13. Re: Effort by smallfries · 2018-02-17 22:18 · Score: 1
  
  No, like all flawed systems of control it means that you suffer the consequences if you get caught.
  Yes, it is self entitled, and also true. Every single one of us is entitled to any piece of information that we can acquire. It is a dellusion to pretend otherwise.
  
  --
  Slashdot: where don knuth is an idiot because he cant grasp the awesome power of php
14. Re: Effort by cyber-vandal · 2018-02-17 22:22 · Score: 2
  
  You work for free then?
15. Re: Effort by cyber-vandal · 2018-02-17 22:28 · Score: 1
  
  The local warlord would torch your house with you in it
16. Re: Effort by smallfries · 2018-02-17 22:49 · Score: 1
  
  No - I create value around the software that I produce.
  
  --
  Slashdot: where don knuth is an idiot because he cant grasp the awesome power of php
17. Re: Effort by cyber-vandal · 2018-02-18 02:50 · Score: 1
  
  Don't the creators of digital goods create value to those that consume them? Should they do that for free?
18. Re: Effort by apoc.famine · 2018-02-18 05:05 · Score: 1
  
  If the media industry had behaved civilly, I'd agree with you. But they didn't. So fuck them.
  From wikipedia: The goal of copyright law, as set forth in the Copyright Clause of the US Constitution, is "to promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries." This includes incentivizing the creation of art, literature, architecture, music, and other works of authorship.
  Infinite copyright, as now purchased by Disney the the like, does not do this. The original term for a copyright was 14 years, with an additional extension of 14 years if the author was still alive. If we return to this, I'll play the game and respect copyright. It will mean that everything made before 1990 is free to use, and I think that will kickstart some amazing works of art and creativity, as people modify and expand on the things that shaped their childhood.
  Limiting my right to play a game I paid money for doesn't do "promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts" either. I have a couple of games that I paid for, and for which the publisher has removed my ability to play the game. One is a DRM scheme that relies on a server that does not exist any more, and another requires an official company server, which no longer exists. Neither company has released a patch or fix, or has otherwise assisted in fixing the issue that they caused.
  
  Sorry, folks, but we live in a capitalist society. You aren't entitled to anything just by right of being able to copy, take, or otherwise acquire it.
  Likewise, we live in a capitalist society. Companies aren't entitled to take something away from me that I legally purchased from them, or otherwise deny me the ability to use what they sold at an arbitrary later date.
  When this no longer happens, I'll happily respect copyright. But at the moment, it's accelerating rather than diminishing. Within the UWP DRM are five separate subsystems, each of which must work for you to play the game you bought. As soon as one doesn't, you are denied what you paid for.
  While the initial goal of this group was not an exactly ethical one, I have a hard time being too mad, knowing that what they did will probably allow someone to play the game they legally purchased in the future, when MS takes that ability away from them.
  When corporations stop screwing us with copyright bullshit like this, I'll be on your side. Until then, fuck those guys, and good on anyone undermining their evil schemes.
  
  --
  Velociraptor = Distiraptor / Timeraptor
19. Re: Effort by smallfries · 2018-02-18 06:49 · Score: 1
  
  Should we pretend that information can be owned to satisfy their poor choice of business model?
  
  --
  Slashdot: where don knuth is an idiot because he cant grasp the awesome power of php
20. Re: Effort by cyber-vandal · 2018-02-18 07:13 · Score: 1
  
  Their poor choice of business model entitles you to their work? Will you come and do some dev for me? I won't pay you because information can be duplicated.
21. Re: Effort by smallfries · 2018-02-18 19:26 · Score: 1
  
  What they consider to be their "work" is a poor choice given that it can be freely copied and they depend on scarity. It's a pretty dumb decision. Everybody is "entitled" to any information that they can acquire, why should it be otherwise?
  
  --
  Slashdot: where don knuth is an idiot because he cant grasp the awesome power of php
22. Re: Effort by Bert64 · 2018-02-18 20:39 · Score: 1
  
  Capitalism actually encourages taking shortcuts and copying, and even producing cheaper copies yourself for a profit.
  It's only government regulation (which capitalists claim to hate) which enforces copyrights and patents.
  
  --
  http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
23. Re: Effort by cyber-vandal · 2018-02-18 20:58 · Score: 1
  
  Everyone is entitled to someone else's work? So you will work for me for free then? Cool. Send me your details and I'll send you the specification.
24. Re: Effort by Bert64 · 2018-02-18 23:39 · Score: 1
  
  No, i get paid for my work but i don't expect my grandkids to continue being paid for something i once produced...
  
  --
  http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
25. Re: Effort by Bert64 · 2018-02-19 01:58 · Score: 1
  
  Even 14+14 years is too much these days. At the time it made sense, it was a time consuming process to print books and distribute them around the world but today the internet allows instant distribution worldwide.
  Most media has stopped being sold long before 14 years expires, let alone 28, and it doesn't cost anything to keep a download available...
  Copyright should automatically expire once something is no longer available for purchase. Nothing is more destructive than just sitting on something, not willing to sell it but also not willing to let anyone else have it - it's like the schoolyard bully who doesn't want to play with a toy, but keeps it away and prevents others from doing so either.
  
  --
  http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
26. Re:Effort by Bert64 · 2018-02-19 02:05 · Score: 1
  
  I don't think i've ever met anyone who would prefer to pirate a game, but decides to buy it at full price if a pirate copy is not available.
  Generally there are those who want to pay, and those who want or need to pirate.
  Those who want to pirate will always do so, and will wait for a pirate copy to become available.
  Many people pirate because they can't afford not to, these people *might* buy a game if it becomes cheap enough, DRM has nothing to do with that, only the cost.
  Those who generally want to buy games will do so, but some will pirate if they have no other choice - eg the game is not available to buy, or the drm causes too many problems for them.
  
  --
  http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
27. Re: Effort by Bert64 · 2018-02-19 02:07 · Score: 1
  
  Only they don't...
  The masses will just download a copy thats been cracked by someone else.
  DRM schemes only inconvenience paying customers through compatibility problems, decreased performance and decreased stability. As a customer i would also be offended to know that so much development effort has gone into customer-hostile features like drm instead of improving the actual product.
  
  --
  http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
28. Re: Effort by JesseMcDonald · 2018-02-19 09:10 · Score: 1
  
  You don't get to decide what other people do with their stuff.
  This is exactly right. So how do you reconcile this with your pro-copyright position? Copyright is exactly this: deciding what other people can do with their stuff.
  Yes, their stuff, and not yours. Property rights are fundamentally about who has the right to decide how a good is "used up" (consumed), and are exclusive only to the extent that the goods are scarce, i.e. cannot simultaneously be consumed for multiple purposes. It makes no sense to try to apply property rights to ideas, information, media, and/or "content", as these things are not scarce and cannot be consumed, so any right of ownership one might claim over such things could not possibly be infringed. The only "stuff" involved in making a copy to which the concept of ownership can be applied are the physical materials, which belong to the person making the copy, not the copyright holder.
  If you want to maintain control over information you produce, keep it to yourself. Don't publish it to the world and then try to claim that this somehow justifies telling other people how to use their stuff. Your exclusive control ends the moment you choose to share the information with others. At that point they have just as much right to copy and distribute it as you do.
  
  --
  "The state is that great fiction by which everyone tries to live at the expense of everyone else." - Bastiat
29. Re: Effort by Kurrelgyre · 2018-02-19 09:40 · Score: 1
  
  You've conflated the right to make a copy with the license governing a copy.
30. Re:Effort by phoenix_rizzen · 2018-02-19 11:28 · Score: 1
  
  There's also the group that doesn't mind paying for games, but will then download the cracked version in order to get a better playing experience.
  Similar to the group of people who will buy movies on DVD/BR, but download (or rip if they have the know-how/tools) a copy for use on the media server / player.
  I have no problem paying for things. But I'll find a way to use what I buy on any device I want to use it on, thank you very much!
31. Re: Effort by apoc.famine · 2018-02-19 16:07 · Score: 1
  
  I don't disagree that 28 years is too much. But If there is a minimum, that's it, unless "We the people" can pile up enough money to make 60% of our "representatives" to fix that.
  And that's never going to happen.
  
  --
  Velociraptor = Distiraptor / Timeraptor
32. Re: Effort by smallfries · 2018-02-19 20:10 · Score: 1
  
  You can have anything that I choose to produce, which is why it is freely released. Why do you think this would let you choose what I work on?
  
  --
  Slashdot: where don knuth is an idiot because he cant grasp the awesome power of php
33. Re: Effort by cyber-vandal · 2018-02-19 21:10 · Score: 1
  
  You feel that others should work for you for nothing so I'm inferring that you are also prepared to work for nothing. Let me know when you're available and I'll send you some stuff to work on.
34. Re: Effort by smallfries · 2018-02-20 00:41 · Score: 1
  
  You keep trying to bend my point into what you want to say. It's an interesting, though ineffective, strategy for arguing.
  * I say that once people make what they have chosen to work upon available it is freely copyable.
  * You keep saying that people should not be able to chose what to work on, that it should be chosen for them.
  Why are you having such a hard time understanding the difference? Or perhaps you do understand the difference, but it is the only way to try to make your weak line of argument work. Have you got anything else?
  
  --
  Slashdot: where don knuth is an idiot because he cant grasp the awesome power of php
35. Re: Effort by cyber-vandal · 2018-02-20 07:32 · Score: 1
  
  You say that you should be able to get the product of many people's work for no money, I.e. expecting them to work for free to entertain you. As you have that attitude, I don't see why you're not prepared to work for free for me. What's the difference?
36. Re: Effort by smallfries · 2018-02-20 22:51 · Score: 1
  
  Exactly as explained in previous post. Are you really having trouble understanding?
  
  --
  Slashdot: where don knuth is an idiot because he cant grasp the awesome power of php
37. Re: Effort by cyber-vandal · 2018-02-21 04:29 · Score: 1
  
  If you expect others to work for you for free then surely you don't have a problem with me asking you to work for me for free. If you do have a problem with that then you shouldn't expect others to do the same. It's really not that complicated.
38. Re: Effort by smallfries · 2018-02-21 19:31 · Score: 1
  
  As I've already said in response to this point: you keep trying to bend my point into what you want to say. It's an interesting, though ineffective, strategy for arguing.
  * I say that once people make what they have chosen to work upon available it is freely copyable.
  * You keep saying that people should not be able to chose what to work on, that it should be chosen for them.
  Why are you having such a hard time understanding the difference? Or perhaps you do understand the difference, but it is the only way to try to make your weak line of argument work. Have you got anything else?
  
  --
  Slashdot: where don knuth is an idiot because he cant grasp the awesome power of php
39. Re: Effort by cyber-vandal · 2018-02-22 05:38 · Score: 1
  
  If you expect others to work for you for free then surely you don't have a problem with me asking you to work for me for free. If you do have a problem with that then you shouldn't expect others to do work for you for free. Perhaps your English comprehension is bad.
40. Re: Effort by smallfries · 2018-02-22 19:27 · Score: 1
  
  Why do you claim that you should direct my work?
  It's not a claim that I've made, it is one that you have made. Why do you believe this?
  
  --
  Slashdot: where don knuth is an idiot because he cant grasp the awesome power of php
41. Re: Effort by cyber-vandal · 2018-02-22 19:59 · Score: 1
  
  I'm not claiming that at all. You said in your initial post that you expect large numbers of people in various industries to work for you for free. Therefore I am inferring from that that you are also happy to work for free.
42. Re: Effort by smallfries · 2018-02-23 06:14 · Score: 1
  
  You are claiming that freely available results = working for free. Why are you claiming that?
  
  --
  Slashdot: where don knuth is an idiot because he cant grasp the awesome power of php
43. Re: Effort by cyber-vandal · 2018-02-24 12:30 · Score: 1
  
  They're not freely available. Someone has to create them and you think they should do that for you for nothing.
44. Re: Effort by smallfries · 2018-02-24 21:49 · Score: 1
  
  No - I do not think that: you keep claiming that. A couple of messages ago you admitted it was something you inferred from what I actually said. So it is your claim. I do not agree that it is a reasonable inference from my claim.
  But works that are put online are freely available: DRM cannot work and will be broken. My argument was that they should accept this natural state of affairs instead of trying to pretend otherwise.
  I am not trying to tell people to work for me for free - this is your misunderstanding of what I have said. You've repeated it many times but you have not yet argued why you think it is valid to infer it from what I have said.
  Freely available results != working for free. You keep trying to drive the same point home, but it will not fit because you are wrong. Here are some counter-examples for you:
  1. Academics - freely available results, paid a salary for their work.
  2. Streamers - freely available output, paid a slice of ad revenue.
  3. Patreon-supported artists - have not got a clue how this works but it seems to.
  4. Open-source programmers - freely available output, paid for services around it.
  In each of these cases people are paid to create something that is made freely available. Your repeated assertion that making results freely available is the same as working for free is clearly wrong.
  
  --
  Slashdot: where don knuth is an idiot because he cant grasp the awesome power of php
The biggest surprise to me... by Anonymous Coward · 2018-02-17 04:18 · Score: 1

...is that there's apparently actual UWP apps out there, waiting to be cracked.
Oh sweet jebus at last! by Gravis+Zero · 2018-02-17 04:21 · Score: 4, Funny

I had pirated Zoo Tycoon and it was the best thing ever but the day I saw Zoo Tycoon Ultimate Animal Collection was the day my world changed. Could I have forked over the money? That's obviously crazy talk but since then I've been all consumed with this the sinking feeling I was missing out on one of the greatest treasures that life has to offer. Now that I can pirate Zoo Tycoon Ultimate Animal Collection, it feels like a piece of my soul has been restored! ;)

--
Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
By Neruos by Anonymous Coward · 2018-02-17 04:33 · Score: 1

You do realize that Cracking/Pirating games/movies anything with DRM is not about money. It has never been about that. It has and always will be about the challenge of defeating a technical wall that 1 human puts up and says no other human can over come. It started with Agriculture, then Industry, Medicine and now the Digital-Age and so on. There are clones of just about everything out there, good or bad, worth it or not. Copying is in the human DNA, it is what humans do and will also do.
Copy, Overcome, Adapt, Success.
1. Re:By Neruos by Sarten-X · 2018-02-17 04:58 · Score: 1
  
  So we're done now, right?
  This wall has fallen. Great. The step-by-step information is available now. There's no challenge left, so if your argument is correct, Zoo Tycoon Ultimate Animal Collection will be the only game UWP broken, with maybe a few exceptions as folks experiment with other techniques.
  We certainly won't see a flood of new titles being broken and released hours or days after their release like we have when other DRM schemes have been broken, right?
  
  --
  You do not have a moral or legal right to do absolutely anything you want.
2. Re:By Neruos by GameboyRMH · 2018-02-17 05:46 · Score: 1
  
  We certainly won't see a flood of new titles being broken and released hours or days after their release like we have when other DRM schemes have been broken, right?
  There will be, because when the wall is breached we take it ALL down to demonstrate to the wall-builders that they have failed. When that first bit of the Berlin wall was breached, they didn't leave all the rest of it in place.
  The challenge stops when idiots stop putting up walls.
  
  --
  "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
Umm... so ... well... by Opportunist · 2018-02-17 04:45 · Score: 1

Who cares?
Seriously, does anyone still buy stuff where you have to jump through 10 hoops just to play the fucking game you just bought and still be accused of being a dirty, rotten bastard who might think of pondering considering or even dreaming of "pirating" it?
As long as you keep buying that shit, studios will think you're ok with it. It's your money, use it to show them what you think of their attempt to tell you when, how and if you may use software that you legally paid for.

--
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Good. by Anonymous Coward · 2018-02-17 04:49 · Score: 1

UWP is one of the most invasive pieces of shit I have ever had the mispleasure of working with.
If you so much as look at the files of a UWP application wrong, there's a good chance you'll fuck it up (thanks to the encrypted file system bullshit) and your only option to fix it is to re-download the entire application from scratch (which is great if you're dealing with a 45GB game). Forget about backing up anything UWP related- it's literally impossible, by design. And good luck getting an older version of an app if the latest version has issues with your system- that too is impossible.
The sooner UWP and the Windows Store dies, the better.
Yet more evidence... by duke_cheetah2003 · 2018-02-17 05:07 · Score: 1

...That DRM is a complete waste of time, effort and resources. Give it up already, dump the DRM, make people happy. Keep the DRM, get cracked again.. and again.. and again. Same old insanity: Deploying DRM expecting it can't be cracked, but every time it is cracked. Yawn.
WTF? by wap911 · 2018-02-17 05:29 · Score: 1

"...important that the game isn't allowed to communicate with the Internet so the group advises users to block the game's executable in their firewall...."
Dotard Windows users are supposed to have the knowledge and skills to monkey with the firewall.
On the other hand borking your OS from the internet keeps me in business.
Pirate? by Anonymous Coward · 2018-02-17 05:38 · Score: 1

They keep using the word "Pirate" over and over too. What felonies were committed on the high seas?
Are they actually talking about "Copyright infringement"? In that case, what copyrighted work has been stolen simply by "cracking" this system? If the door is unlocked, does that mean that the possessions have automatically been stolen?
1. Re: Pirate? by BKX · 2018-02-17 06:03 · Score: 1
  
  The word piracy now refers to certain types of copyright infringement, in addition to theft of vessels and cargo on the high seas. Get over it. Language changes over time. That's the way of the world.
2. Re:Pirate? by Anonymous Coward · 2018-02-17 06:10 · Score: 1
  
  They keep using the word "America". But Amerca is the continent, not a country (???) /s
3. Re:Pirate? by HiThere · 2018-02-17 06:47 · Score: 1
  
  I know. For awhile I tried to get people to use UStatian, but it never caught on.
  
  --
  
  I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
4. Re: Pirate? by Anonymous Coward · 2018-02-17 08:55 · Score: 1
  
  Perhaps the rest of the world can just agree to call it Dumbfuckistan. We already have alternative names for Deutschland and Nippon so it's not as if this would be unusual
5. Re: Pirate? by Anonymous Coward · 2018-02-17 09:53 · Score: 1
  
  Interestingly, the segment was explicitly made short enough that it didn't violate the copyright of the song.
6. Re: Pirate? by Somebody+Is+Using+My · 2018-02-17 13:01 · Score: 1
  
  It's older even than that; a pirate in the sense of "one who takes another's work without permission" dates back to 1701, at least according to Etymology Online. Wikipedia dates it back to 1603:
  
  The practice of labelling the infringement of exclusive rights in creative works as "piracy" predates statutory copyright law. Prior to the Statute of Anne in 1710, the Stationers' Company of London in 1557, received a Royal Charter giving the company a monopoly on publication and tasking it with enforcing the charter. Those who violated the charter were labelled pirates as early as 1603
  People arguing that the words "pirate" and "piracy" only refers to the maritime crime have more than 400 years of history standing against them.
All 5 layers of DRM have been breached! by GameboyRMH · 2018-02-17 05:52 · Score: 1

Oh, the fools! If only they'd built it with 6 layers of DRM! When will they learn!?

--
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
1. Re: All 5 layers of DRM have been breached! by UnknowingFool · 2018-02-17 06:06 · Score: 3, Funny
  
  Clearly it needs to go to 11.
  
  --
  Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
2. Re:All 5 layers of DRM have been breached! by K.+S.+Kyosuke · 2018-02-17 10:01 · Score: 1
  
  If only they'd built it with 6 layers
  It would still have been a piece of cake. :)
  
  --
  Ezekiel 23:20
3. Re:All 5 layers of DRM have been breached! by Megane · 2018-02-17 11:10 · Score: 1
  
  ...and seven proxies.
  
  --
  #naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }
5 layers of DRM by Khyber · 2018-02-17 07:57 · Score: 1

What is this, the new "I'm behind seven proxies" for software?

--
Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
Re:Never used them anyway by ravenshrike · 2018-02-17 09:16 · Score: 1

Here's the thing, whether they're doing it yet or not, MELTDOWN makes all DRM bypassable. Sooner or later the cracking groups will be using MELTDOWN tools to locate and bypass all the DRM calls and encryption mechanisms. Which means that until Covfefe Lake processors can no longer run games on the lowest gimped settings, it's utterly useless.
Buy Nary ... by thomst · 2018-02-17 09:38 · Score: 2

GameboyRMH blathered:

There will be, because when the wall is breached we take it ALL down to demonstrate to the wall-builders that they have failed. When that first bit of the Berlin wall was breached, they didn't leave all the rest of it in place.
The challenge stops when idiots stop putting up walls.
<facepalm>
You are an idiot.
I've been around the scene for a long time - probably longer than you've been alive. R. Bubba Magillicuddy has been a personal friend of mine since he was 13 years old, and I know from many discussions with him and other crackers on the subject over the years that there's absolutely NOTHING ideological in his or his peers' motives for breaking DRM.
R. Bubba started cracking games when he was 12, because he wanted to play them, and couldn't afford to buy them himself. So he taught himself to circumvent copy protection schemes (in assembler!), which let him borrow games from his friends and make working copies for himself. By the time he was 15, he was one of the most accomplished crackers on the planet. The release groups he worked with would overnight him copies of newly-released games from all over the world, just so they could claim bragging rights to being the first to have working cracks of them.
Bubba's motives were never ideological. Neither were those of the other top-flight crackers I've interviewed. They all did it for fun, for recognition on the scene, and for bragging rights. (For instance, other crackers beat 688 Attack Submarine's copy protection, too, but none of their cracks caused the teletype display to print out "Cracked by R. Bubba Magillicuddy!" when you typed any random string into the authenticity check. Bubba could have simply skipped that check routine altogether, of course, but making the game do his bragging for him was just too tempting an exploit to pass up.)
It's not a moral crusade. It wasn't then and it's not now. It's a hobby that lets you play $100 games without paying $100 for them. And the people who merely download and play those games, rather than cracking them personally, aren't doing it as some kind of twisted moral crusade, either. They do it because they don't have to pay actual money for cracked games.
That's it, that's all. The crackers crack games for the lulz and the ego-boo. The lusers download and install them because they're kids, and they don't have the money to spend on games - because their allowances go for dope, and kicks, and gear, instead
You know: priorities ...

--
Check out my novel.
five layers of DRM should be enough for everyone by edxwelch · 2018-02-17 10:21 · Score: 1

This sounds a bit like those Gilette ads. What does layer 5 do that layers 1-4 could not already achieve?
There's a reason it took so long. by SuricouRaven · 2018-02-17 20:49 · Score: 3, Informative

It's the first piece of UWP software anyone actually wanted to pirate.