There are several good reasons to reveal the key. 1) It's useful now 2) The software players are completely b0rken anyhow and could have been revoked/patched any day because of the other keyleaks 3) You want to see what happens, by forcing the issue.
The games has hardly even started. When the hardware guys start chipping away epoxy, that's when the games officially open:-)
Somewhere down the line it makes sense to keep device/host keys secret and let them try some traitor tracing, but not now.
If the person stealing the phone is in my house and able to go through my paperwork in search of a password, I believe I have bigger problems to worry about than losing a few dollars in non-authorized phone calls.
Personally, I have almost all my passwords written down in PasswordSafe. That's the best option I've found, given that I can't memorize 200 good passwords.
I'm no big fan of biometrics, but I believe the idea is that you can have a way longer password than you'd usually have, probably written down somewhere at home instead of memorized, because you'd only use it on "rare occasions" where the convinent biometrics break down.
Again, I don't buy into biometrics, especially not as a single-point of "security", but that's how I'd expect a vendor to defend himself against your argument.
As far as I can tell he's using the expression "known plaintext attack" in a non-standard way though. He's using known "PT" to discover adjacent, in memory, secret keys. It's not a known PT attack in the sense that the PT was "recovered" from under encryption. It's more like knowing there's a sign which says "The key you want is stored two bytes to the right of here" somewhere, and look for it.
I don't agree. Microsoft won the US anti-trust case in practice (they "lost"), and that's because it's inconvinient for anyone with power to do anything about them. Not going to change anytime soon. And besides, how is not aligning with the media corps less anti-trusty than doing so? Being found guilty doesn't mean MS need to suck up to every special interest, heck, they can't even abide by the rules they WERE given, and why should they? They're getting away with it, every day of the week.
The reviewer wasn't around then (on the platform):
"However, in all these years, there has been only one operating system that has captured my heart. While I missed the glory days of the Amiga in the late 80s and early 90s, and was only introduced to the platform a couple of years ago, I can see why its diehard fans have held on to the OS despite having to wait so long for a new version to be released. Call me crazy, but I'm an Amigan now, and will be as long as I can. This OS has struggled past incredible obstaclesboth financial and psychologicaljust to exist, but I'm already anxiously awaiting its successor."
That brings a smile to my face. I can almost understand diehards who almost literally are in love with their darling from the 80s. But he wasn't even on the platform then. That's pretty amazing.
Me, I was there, but I don't really feel the urge to go back. The Amiga was amazing, and the OS had some good ideas, but for me it was only a vehicle for games and demos. The amazing hardware is no more, and the games aren't there.
I guess that leaves the demos, but I'm afraid to go back and discover they're all the bland 3D-object masturbations I saw on the PC. In my memory, they're all so good. Greetz goes out to Melon Dezign.
>But the question is, how much of the MPAA's market are PCs responsible for?
While I don't presume to *KNOW* the mind of the Media Executives of the world, I believe that the key here isn't the present, it's the future. I believe that the people in control want (and firmly believe) in HD Everything and HD Everywhere. Microsoft believe that they will rule the "media center" in every home, just like they rule every desktop. This is their mission, and they're going for it (and remember, in their vision your media center is Windows Vista Powered!).
So MP/RIAA and MS share the same goal, and between them they're planning on cashing in, and cashing in good.
And remember, Microsoft is in on the AACS specification, they're getting their part of the toll loot on everything that plays "HD", including set-top boxes. They're in, with a finger in the cookie jar!
HD Everything: It's not obvious today how much we use computers to view and play media in the context of HD, because most things aren't HD yet. First, remember that "HD" isn't just about Movies. It's about all media, including Sound. The media industry vision is "HD Everything". A large percentage of the clips on youtube come from a source which in the future vision will be HD, and therefore protected, from the BIOS up through the Media out to the monitors and speakers. You want to see clips on the internet? Sure. But it's "HD". And it's protected. Play music through digital outputs? Sure. But it's "HD". And it's protected, and we've just deprecated analog output, for your convinience. Don't need it with your new Microsoft Media Center anyhow.
HD Everywhere: "HD" will be in portable players, on your computer, in your living room, in your office, on your radio. You can pick any entertainment you want, as long as it's "HD". I believe their mission is to plug not only the analog hole, byt the Non-HD Hole, as it were.
So, many people might not use HD at all today. Heck, relatively few use it at all, never mind in their computers instead of set top boxes. Basically, "HD" isn't much of an issue to any consumer, if we look at the numbers today.
But it's really not about today. Where you and I see Ozymandias desert, they see the first stones of their new empire.
I'm not a strong believer in the "Microsoft has no real choice" hypothesis. I don't think MS need the RI/MPAA members of the world as much as they need MS. First of all, MS are a part of, and presumably very active, member of the AACS licensing agency. I know this because it says so in the specifications. Maybe the other members could block them from implementing it, but I consider that unlikely (and why would they want too?).
Secondly, and the real point, MS rule basically every desktop in the world already. Do you believe that computes to leverage FOR or AGAINST Microsoft when negotiation with the MPAAs? Truly, the MPAAs would be at the mercy of MS. "Here's the DRM we're willing of giving you in Vista, be glad you're getting as much!".
I'm more a follower of the "Microsoft is doing this for their own, lock-in based, reasons". The history of Microsoft is the history of vendor lock-in and market control through technology.
Maybe MS really want the RIAAs and MPAAs on their side in the fight against the iPod? Maybe if MS give the RIAAs and the MPAAs what they want. One back scratched for another... If I didn't despise the MPAAs of the world, I'd raise a warning about MS long documented betrayalish ways, but I do.
BTW. Do you know what company I didn't see stamped on the first page of the AACS specifications?
"Windows Media Player cannot play this DVD because there is a problem with digital copy protection between your DVD drive, decoder and video card. Try installing an updated driver for your video card."
Two other keys? Last time I checked (which was a a day or two ago), keys were available for the following titles: 12 Monkeys,
Aeon Flux, Apollo 13, Batman Begins, Casino, Charlie And The Chocolate Factory, Chronicles of Riddick, Constantine, Enter the Dragon, Equilibrium (Jap), Fear & Loathing Las Vegas, Happy Gilmore, Harry Potter GOF (UK), King Kong, The Last Samurai, The Matador, Miami Vice,
Mission: Impossible, Mission: Impossible 2, Mission: Impossible 3, The Mummy, Pitch Black,
Red Dragon, Sahara, Scorpion King, Serenity, Superman: The Movie, Superman II: Donner Cut,
SuperMan Returns, The Pianist (uk), The Thing, Total Recall (fr), Troy, U-571, V for Vendetta, We Were Soldiers and World Trade Center.
Which makes one wonder about the taste of early adopters, but...
If a representative of Timbaland/the record company approaches you with an offer of any kind, first ask when the offer expires, then explain that you will put it to your lawyer. Then do that. Find a lawyer, if you don't have one already, and explain the situation and the fact and content of the offer. Watch their eyes pop as you explain that an offer's been made.
Then fucking take evil for everything they have in court.
Read everything that's to be signed by you. Don't give up any rights for the song, license it at a per case basis. Don't give your lawyer power of attorney to work on your behalf unless you really really trust him and have limited his powers in some way (written). Being passive in that could be a huge mistake.
Yeah, let's give Darl and Sontag more money for their extortion scam. That'll fucking teach them!
Considering their general SoftEng incompetence...
on
Premiere Back on Mac
·
· Score: 0, Offtopic
Considering that Adobe, even at version 9.0, hasn't been able to implements neither bookmarks nor "desktop save/restore" (that is, the application restoring open documents/positions in them between restarts) into their Adobe Acrobat Reader PDF viewer... I just don't see how they can have ANY chance with something as advanced as video editing when they can't even develop basic, much requested features for a document viewer.
It's pathetic. Imagine if in 2007 your web browser didn't have bookmarks?
OS/2 was never the gaming platform of the future
on
Is Vista the New OS/2?
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
If I may speculate (which I love to do), I predict that if "leaking" title- (and possibly even host-) keys become common, software players (or at least their HD-module) will NOT get licensed from AACS-LA unless they only run on "Trusted Computing Platforms". Of course, the media moguls have a problem here since they need their format to win in the market, so it's a trade-off for them for sure. If people resist "Trusted" computing, HD-DVD/AACS may have an 'effective' lifespan that's even shorter than what DVD-CSS had.
Shame on Intel and AMD for not following there. They deserve to be shamed in benchmarking, but no site seems to have the know-how to run PadLock-enabled benchmarks (OpenSSL, Loop-AES, etc)
# cat/proc/cpuinfo
[..] flags : fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic sep mtrr pge cmov pat clflush acpi mmx fxsr sse sse2 tm nx pni est tm2 rng rng_en ace ace_en ace2 ace2_en phe phe_en pmm pmm_en
Statistics since Fri Dec 10 01:14:04 2004 (726 days and 15 hours ago)
[...] Of 2097 items that were initially greylisted: - 468 ( 22.3%) became whitelisted - 1629 ( 77.7%) expired from the greylist
That's for my home box which only serves ME. Now, to make sense of the stats, one must take into account:
I haven't bothered whitelisting (which in my setup bypasses whitelisting completely and thus such messages doesn't show up in the stats at all -- I use this for the high-volume mailinglists I'm on) some low-volume mailinglists, so the "became whitelisted" is in that sense artificially high (and vice versa).
Greylisting happens after DNS-blocking.
So, of the mail that made it past whitelisting ("unknown") AND made it past DNS-blacklisting, 80% was never seen again.
Then of the 20% that makes it through (the 468 over two years!), the percentage that isn't good, goes up against the spam filter in my mailer.
So to go back to the question in the article blurb... No, I have NOT noticed an increase in spam.
I tried to do something similar in concept the other day, clicking around last.fm in search of someone with whom I did not share a single common artist.
The closest I got was one MrLag, with whom the only commonality was U2 and Dido:-)
(Of course, my "musical opposite" should have listened to about the same number of artists/tracks for this to be interesting)
Slashdot Mirror
>Unless you keep the device key a personal secret (in which case, what's the point?)
(ignoring traitor tracing) Because you're a HD-DVD/BluRay Movie Release Group and want an edge on the competition?
There are several good reasons to reveal the key. 1) It's useful now 2) The software players are completely b0rken anyhow and could have been revoked/patched any day because of the other keyleaks 3) You want to see what happens, by forcing the issue.
The games has hardly even started. When the hardware guys start chipping away epoxy, that's when the games officially open :-)
Somewhere down the line it makes sense to keep device/host keys secret and let them try some traitor tracing, but not now.
If the person stealing the phone is in my house and able to go through my paperwork in search of a password, I believe I have bigger problems to worry about than losing a few dollars in non-authorized phone calls.
Personally, I have almost all my passwords written down in PasswordSafe. That's the best option I've found, given that I can't memorize 200 good passwords.
I'm no big fan of biometrics, but I believe the idea is that you can have a way longer password than you'd usually have, probably written down somewhere at home instead of memorized, because you'd only use it on "rare occasions" where the convinent biometrics break down.
Again, I don't buy into biometrics, especially not as a single-point of "security", but that's how I'd expect a vendor to defend himself against your argument.
Miss a period and they go wild.
As far as I can tell he's using the expression "known plaintext attack" in a non-standard way though. He's using known "PT" to discover adjacent, in memory, secret keys. It's not a known PT attack in the sense that the PT was "recovered" from under encryption. It's more like knowing there's a sign which says "The key you want is stored two bytes to the right of here" somewhere, and look for it.
I don't agree. Microsoft won the US anti-trust case in practice (they "lost"), and that's because it's inconvinient for anyone with power to do anything about them. Not going to change anytime soon. And besides, how is not aligning with the media corps less anti-trusty than doing so? Being found guilty doesn't mean MS need to suck up to every special interest, heck, they can't even abide by the rules they WERE given, and why should they? They're getting away with it, every day of the week.
The reviewer wasn't around then (on the platform):
"However, in all these years, there has been only one operating system that has captured my heart. While I missed the glory days of the Amiga in the late 80s and early 90s, and was only introduced to the platform a couple of years ago, I can see why its diehard fans have held on to the OS despite having to wait so long for a new version to be released. Call me crazy, but I'm an Amigan now, and will be as long as I can. This OS has struggled past incredible obstaclesboth financial and psychologicaljust to exist, but I'm already anxiously awaiting its successor."
That brings a smile to my face. I can almost understand diehards who almost literally are in love with their darling from the 80s. But he wasn't even on the platform then. That's pretty amazing.
Me, I was there, but I don't really feel the urge to go back. The Amiga was amazing, and the OS had some good ideas, but for me it was only a vehicle for games and demos. The amazing hardware is no more, and the games aren't there.
I guess that leaves the demos, but I'm afraid to go back and discover they're all the bland 3D-object masturbations I saw on the PC. In my memory, they're all so good. Greetz goes out to Melon Dezign.
>But the question is, how much of the MPAA's market are PCs responsible for?
While I don't presume to *KNOW* the mind of the Media Executives of the world, I believe that the key here isn't the present, it's the future. I believe that the people in control want (and firmly believe) in HD Everything and HD Everywhere. Microsoft believe that they will rule the "media center" in every home, just like they rule every desktop. This is their mission, and they're going for it (and remember, in their vision your media center is Windows Vista Powered!).
So MP/RIAA and MS share the same goal, and between them they're planning on cashing in, and cashing in good.
And remember, Microsoft is in on the AACS specification, they're getting their part of the toll loot on everything that plays "HD", including set-top boxes. They're in, with a finger in the cookie jar!
HD Everything: It's not obvious today how much we use computers to view and play media in the context of HD, because most things aren't HD yet. First, remember that "HD" isn't just about Movies. It's about all media, including Sound. The media industry vision is "HD Everything". A large percentage of the clips on youtube come from a source which in the future vision will be HD, and therefore protected, from the BIOS up through the Media out to the monitors and speakers. You want to see clips on the internet? Sure. But it's "HD". And it's protected. Play music through digital outputs? Sure. But it's "HD". And it's protected, and we've just deprecated analog output, for your convinience. Don't need it with your new Microsoft Media Center anyhow.
HD Everywhere: "HD" will be in portable players, on your computer, in your living room, in your office, on your radio. You can pick any entertainment you want, as long as it's "HD". I believe their mission is to plug not only the analog hole, byt the Non-HD Hole, as it were.
So, many people might not use HD at all today. Heck, relatively few use it at all, never mind in their computers instead of set top boxes. Basically, "HD" isn't much of an issue to any consumer, if we look at the numbers today.
But it's really not about today. Where you and I see Ozymandias desert, they see the first stones of their new empire.
I'm not a strong believer in the "Microsoft has no real choice" hypothesis. I don't think MS need the RI/MPAA members of the world as much as they need MS. First of all, MS are a part of, and presumably very active, member of the AACS licensing agency. I know this because it says so in the specifications. Maybe the other members could block them from implementing it, but I consider that unlikely (and why would they want too?).
Secondly, and the real point, MS rule basically every desktop in the world already. Do you believe that computes to leverage FOR or AGAINST Microsoft when negotiation with the MPAAs? Truly, the MPAAs would be at the mercy of MS. "Here's the DRM we're willing of giving you in Vista, be glad you're getting as much!".
I'm more a follower of the "Microsoft is doing this for their own, lock-in based, reasons". The history of Microsoft is the history of vendor lock-in and market control through technology.
Maybe MS really want the RIAAs and MPAAs on their side in the fight against the iPod? Maybe if MS give the RIAAs and the MPAAs what they want. One back scratched for another... If I didn't despise the MPAAs of the world, I'd raise a warning about MS long documented betrayalish ways, but I do.
BTW. Do you know what company I didn't see stamped on the first page of the AACS specifications?
Apple.
Lesser members perhaps. Now who is in control?
Only in the way that "The problem is the cold, not the AIDS". Symptomatic.
You can argue it if you want too, but I think my mind is pretty made up where the fault actually lies.
> Exactly how is it less usable then XP. They pretty much both work.
I think the first post on this page (check out the images) summarize it pretty succinctly:
Break out common functionality and put it in a superclass which both children inherit.
Two other keys? Last time I checked (which was a a day or two ago), keys were available for the following titles: 12 Monkeys, Aeon Flux, Apollo 13, Batman Begins, Casino, Charlie And The Chocolate Factory, Chronicles of Riddick, Constantine, Enter the Dragon, Equilibrium (Jap), Fear & Loathing Las Vegas, Happy Gilmore, Harry Potter GOF (UK), King Kong, The Last Samurai, The Matador, Miami Vice, Mission: Impossible, Mission: Impossible 2, Mission: Impossible 3, The Mummy, Pitch Black, Red Dragon, Sahara, Scorpion King, Serenity, Superman: The Movie, Superman II: Donner Cut, SuperMan Returns, The Pianist (uk), The Thing, Total Recall (fr), Troy, U-571, V for Vendetta, We Were Soldiers and World Trade Center.
Which makes one wonder about the taste of early adopters, but...
IANAL.
If a representative of Timbaland/the record company approaches you with an offer of any kind, first ask when the offer expires, then explain that you will put it to your lawyer. Then do that. Find a lawyer, if you don't have one already, and explain the situation and the fact and content of the offer. Watch their eyes pop as you explain that an offer's been made.
Then fucking take evil for everything they have in court.
Read everything that's to be signed by you. Don't give up any rights for the song, license it at a per case basis. Don't give your lawyer power of attorney to work on your behalf unless you really really trust him and have limited his powers in some way (written). Being passive in that could be a huge mistake.
IANAL.
That's what Sony say about the PS3. I don't think it'll work there either.
Yeah, let's give Darl and Sontag more money for their extortion scam. That'll fucking teach them!
Considering that Adobe, even at version 9.0, hasn't been able to implements neither bookmarks nor "desktop save/restore" (that is, the application restoring open documents/positions in them between restarts) into their Adobe Acrobat Reader PDF viewer... I just don't see how they can have ANY chance with something as advanced as video editing when they can't even develop basic, much requested features for a document viewer.
It's pathetic. Imagine if in 2007 your web browser didn't have bookmarks?
'Nuff said.
If I may speculate (which I love to do), I predict that if "leaking" title- (and possibly even host-) keys become common, software players (or at least their HD-module) will NOT get licensed from AACS-LA unless they only run on "Trusted Computing Platforms". Of course, the media moguls have a problem here since they need their format to win in the market, so it's a trade-off for them for sure. If people resist "Trusted" computing, HD-DVD/AACS may have an 'effective' lifespan that's even shorter than what DVD-CSS had.
Looking forward to some cryptographic attacks.
>For encryption? No.
"Yes" if you have a VIA CPU with PadLock.
Shame on Intel and AMD for not following there. They deserve to be shamed in benchmarking, but no site seems to have the know-how to run PadLock-enabled benchmarks (OpenSSL, Loop-AES, etc)
# cat /proc/cpuinfo
[..]
flags : fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic sep mtrr pge cmov pat clflush acpi mmx fxsr sse sse2 tm nx pni est tm2 rng rng_en ace ace_en ace2 ace2_en phe phe_en pmm pmm_en
Statistics since Fri Dec 10 01:14:04 2004 (726 days and 15 hours ago)
[...]
Of 2097 items that were initially greylisted:
- 468 ( 22.3%) became whitelisted
- 1629 ( 77.7%) expired from the greylist
That's for my home box which only serves ME. Now, to make sense of the stats, one must take into account:
So, of the mail that made it past whitelisting ("unknown") AND made it past DNS-blacklisting, 80% was never seen again.
Then of the 20% that makes it through (the 468 over two years!), the percentage that isn't good, goes up against the spam filter in my mailer.
So to go back to the question in the article blurb... No, I have NOT noticed an increase in spam.
>record everything on every channel (well, in theory... I'd love to see the hardware for that!).
Something like this:
I tried to do something similar in concept the other day, clicking around last.fm in search of someone with whom I did not share a single common artist.
The closest I got was one MrLag, with whom the only commonality was U2 and Dido :-)
(Of course, my "musical opposite" should have listened to about the same number of artists/tracks for this to be interesting)
The format that first/most conviniently gets ripped and XvidD'ed.