So now that HD-DVD AACS is cracked? - Right before CES.

I'm not sure but I thought that Blu-ray uses the same protection scheme? I could be wrong though!!

Either way......this is not good news for the future of HD DVD or Blu Ray

Why would the studios make "ANY" movement? AACS isn't like CSS encryption. A hacker may have initial success but there are ways to plug the holes.

This is such a dumb thread.

^
Blu-ray adds another DRM layer, called BD+. This might affect the process.

I would not take this too seriously right now until more is known about it.

As a generality, it seems to me that it is very hard to develop a system that allows people to see and hear the movie but not copy it! Microsoft spends a lot of money trying to make Windows secure and look at the results so far. [This is not Microsoft bashing, merely an expression of the difficulties involved.]

As to whether or not it affects CES, I would doubt it at this point.

This could mean that how HD DVD works with computers will be reconsidered (and perhaps Blu-ray as well.)

BD+ requires AACS to work. Its usage is disallowed without AACS. In addition, BD+ is pretty defenseless without AACS. So there is no salvation for BD if AACS is broken. Also, Alex reports that in the BD seminar in December, they said BD+ is not ready and won't be there for some time...


AACS already has seperate provisions for PC use versus CE.

As far as I'm aware, BD+ has not been used on any title to date. And I haven't seen any mention of it being used on announced titles. An insider can correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm under the impression that both BD and HD-DVD are using identical copy protection at this time.

hahahaha.

Sure. But first you have to explain just wtf "civilizedly" means. lol

This is the big one IMO.

First, it means nothing yet. I hope the mods change the title of this topic to say AACS is "potentially" hacked.

Second, any hacker would also quickly move on to BD and do the same there.

Third, depending on the nature of break, there are a number of countermeasures in AACS. This is not CSS where any break is a global break. But until those facts are known, there is not much to discuss.

Big one for what? The ROM mark provides no protection in these situations.

Describe 'situation?'

Are we talking about burning by the home-hobbyist ford playing 'back-ups,' or are we talking about massive counterfeiting operations? No in the former situation it does nothing, but in the later it does... whereas HD DVD has no such added security measure.

When and if AACS does get "Jon'd," I believe the ROM-Mark is going to have a material effect on the degrees to which the IPs proliferate on the street, HD DVD vs BD.

Ironically of course, the current equipment expense and 'difficulty' of BD replication is in a way it's own barrier to mass piracy operations, at least for the time being. HD DVD has no such 'layman' constraints. Layman of course being used liberally in this context...

Give it up...you went down the wrong road. ROM Mark has nothing to do with cracks like this. You're trying to make a link that simply isn't there.

If this guy were to distribute his cracked movie on the internet (as an example), is there any kind of watermark or signal in the movie file that would identify the specific piece of hardware used to crack it?

I see. So... you don't disagree with me, you just think it's the 'wrong road.'

You may not understand the premise of this thread, but it's not the fact that AACS has been cracked. The premise of this thread is that studios may seek further comfort in BDs added security layers. ROM-Mark is a very real aspect of that, because it effects the viability of breaches like these on the mass piracy market. Which is considered 'mass' for a reason...

We're not talking about P2P download/burns here.

How many HD-DVD 360 drives will M$ sell because of this? (assuming this true and can be easily repeated)

Heck, I have/had no intentions of buying a player for either format, but even I might be temped to buy one for $200 if it has this type of functionality. I'll wait a while, though, and see how this plays out. I can 'get by' with using vanilla DVD for a good long time.

I could probably rant on for a bit about my feelings about DRM schemes, but I'll just vote with my wallet and watch the fur fly.

If you read the linked thread above, AACS is not "cracked". In order to decrypt the protected media, you have to provide different keys for each film. It doesn't explain how they obtained the keys.

Once the drive authenticates the media as being real, which is the case in this claimed attack, then from then on, the Rom mark plays no part. Indeed, this is the major weakness of Rom mark. In real world, it provides no protection as hackers can steal the bits even with a valid Rom mark. And once the bits are taken, and distributed electronically, it doesn't matter what the mark did or did not.


I highly doubt that the target of anyone hacking BD is to go and distribute the same on BD disc. They are going to distribute them instead in electronic means or for downconversion to other formats. Heck, they can use the bits to make HD DVDs! Now that would be quite ironic, wouldn't it?


Again, once the AACS layer is broken, and bits are in the clear, the format is broken and whether it had a mark or not is of little consequence.


Please see above.

Amir I still don't agree with your spin on the issue wrt ROM-Mark; but on the side I guess you missed the thread a couple of weeks ago where a forum member successfully backed up an HD DVD to Blu-ray. So... is that irony deserving of a smily face as well?

The studios likely know that all encryption methods are eventually defeated. The object is to keep the price/technology of piracy so high it's not worth it to all but the largest outfits. I've never been a fan of technology like ROM Mark. My guess is it'll be easier to defeat than gaining temporary access to HD data through AACS.

The bottom line is that all the BD fans celebrating this news are proving how poisonous and foolish they're celebration is towards the format war. If AACS is in fact temporarily hacked, it means just as much bad studio mojo (for a lack of better term) for BD as HD DVD. As noted earlier, keys are still secured and the author does not disclose how (or if he did) obtain the keys.

There is no spin on the audio mark, the "additional layers of BD protection" aren't really strong and rely on a strong foundation of AACS, without AACS they can easily crumble. Lets not jump off of cliffs because Petra induces a clear troll thread. (Trolls don't act like lemmings do they?)

You can understand though, that the very reasons you are not a fan of ROM-Mark technology would be the very reasons the studios are. I think we can all take a random stab at guessing which format is more expensive to bootstrap a replication effort for as well.

Explain that then to me would you Forceflow? This 'crumbling' you refer to.

There are too many posters on this forum that misinterpret Amir's statements and think that they themselves have gained the ability to speak authoritatively on the matters at hand because they think they are correctly parroting his claims.

Totally hit the nail on the head there, xb!

Since HD DVD player is allowed to play HD DVD-Video format on a HD DVD-ROM disc without AACS protection unlike BD player is not allowed to do so (ROM mark is also required), if certain title keys are compromised, there is no way to stop commercial pirated discs of certain titles being replicated. No countermeasure is available for this case.

If hacked one is a device key and the hacker unwisely distributes it, AACS entity will simply revoke that compromised key, plain and simple.

ROM mark does not work for home piracy and does not affect anything about decryption of AACS and converting plain data to another format. It only works for commercial pirated discs on BD players. But even ROM mark is useless against home piracy and video sharing on the internet, studios do really care about commercial piracy, I think.

It hasn't even been successfully demonstrated that this has created an "in the clear" hacked copy yet. We're a little ahead of the game.

Here's the relevant portion of the text I'm referring to:


As best I can tell, all they've done is compared the binaries and proclaimed them different without the ability to play it back.

It is an unsubstantiated claim, and it is possible that AACS hasn't been cracked at all.


This is like having an Enigma device and knowing the code key for the day. You have the crypto key you can get the clean output. There's no way of knowing how the key was retrieved and that is one of the most important points.

Another question of mine is how strong is this key? Not asked or answered.

While I'm by no means a cryppie the key strength is one of the key parms for determining how successful a brute force attack will be. Of course it's also possible that the key generation pattern is easily hacked, ie not sufficiently randomized which would lead to a more easily attacked key generation. I'm assuming it wasn't a criminally stupid key generation scheme.

Me, I think it's in the "too soon to tell" category. But it'll be interesting to see how this unfolds.

Cheers,