* Posts by Mashiara

7 posts • joined 10 Jun 2009

Intel confirms HDCP copy-protection crack


HDCP does not protect BD (alone)

Some have hinted at it but IMO it has not been made clear enough: HDCP does not protect Blu-Ray Disks (BD), it's link-level protocol to encrypt the raw, uncompressed (~5 gbit/s for 1080p + 8ch audio) video and audio stream, meaning about 1-2TB / movie, now, TB class disks are not exactly impossibly expensive but you need a proper RAID setup to be able to write fast enough to keep up with the stream (also some sort of HW to read the stream from the wire is required)

Anyway I'm fairly sure cracking the BD level protection continues to be the preferred way for normal users to backup/format shift their HD content. The "real pirates" get their content from unencrypted master sources anyway so nothing new there as well.

HDCP only would make sense if it was possible to make the disk/player level DRM systems so strong that going through "link hole" would be easier than cracking the DRM for those that wish to do format shifting/backup of disks they already have (again: pirated HD material is readily available in the internet in any case, and it's a sad state of affairs when the "pirates" have so much better product than the "real deal")


Nokia sharpens Vision with Novarra buy


N900 is not the flagship device

Of course the N900 is neither the flagship device (N97 is) or a smartphone, it's a mobile computer.

Now because it has a GSM chip for net access it can make and receive phone calls (and SMS) too, but it does not mean it's primary purpose is to be a phone (and based on the very basic phone functionality it definitely isn't, not that I care, I like the way it is...)

<joke>ps. MMS is for w*nkers</joke>


Mole-cruiser planned to attack Iranian nuke bunkers


re: summon ctonian

I recommend checking out The Atrocity Archives: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Atrocity_Archives

Really good book in the alternative history genre.


Texas Instruments aims lawyers at calculator hackers


re wii/ps3/xbox keys

It's not different and neither should these keys be a problem, if you reverse-engineered the system to be able to deduce the keys IMO it's fair game (of course in some places reverse engineering byt itself is illegal...)

Now if you had gotten the keys into your posession by for example breaking and entering the offices, then there's some argument about this. If you had received keys under NDA then it's simply NDA violation and standard remedies apply.

Of course since there are huge interests at play even if they can't legallty force you to unpublish the keys they can simply say that do it or we'll make sure your life becomes incredibly difficult (nuisance lawsuits, ask the gov to do extra tax audits: dig deep enough and you'll always find irregularities, etcetc). This of course is highly immoral and for some parts illegal but it hasn't stopped it in the past.

Besides the signing keys don't really facilitiate much in the way of actual copyright infringement:

1. The original copyrighted software could be read all along, the signing key is just to verify it's not been tampered with, doing 1:1 copy was already possible.

2. Large scale pirates copy games already signed, the "disk key" systems are nothing but a minor speedbump when we talk about manufacturing (they're designed to stop only casual between friends copying anyway).

The only case where the signing keys could be used to "faciliate" copyright infringement is by making a modified OS that does not check game/disk signatures. But since the OS itself was already copyrighted distributing this modified version is already illegal, the keys are immaterial to this (also it's possible that there are implementation errors which would allow the OS to be patched while still matching the original signatures and thus this could again be possible without the signing keys).

So basically it's about platforn control, copyright has nothing to do with it but since it has "software" the overly draconian copyright laws can be twisted to slap those who do not have huge funds to waste on principles (or have something to lose) back into their proper place as serfs. This won't stop untill the corporations and their lawyers personally start to get heavily penalized for misusing the copyright arguments for something that doesn't really have anything to do with it.


Apple accused of lowering cone of silence over iPod flame out


LiPo batteries are dangerous, period.

As stated above check model aircraft forums (I have two electric helis, a small micro and 450 size) for what happens to damaged batteries. The safety-sheet you get with your battery states all kinds of interesting things among them:

1. If involved in a crash, even if not visibly damaged, dispose of safely (separate set of instructions)

2. Always charge in non-flammable (preferably fireproof) container.

Then there's of course the "do not short-circuit", especially since these batteries do not have current limiters, they just state that safe current is for example 25C (25xcapasity, for 1200mAh cell that would be 30A !!) continuous and 30C burst and user is responsible for making sure these limits are not exceeded (which would cause damage to the battery possibly leading to fire).

These batteries burn very violently and the ipod case is sealed pretty tight, so it's not inconceivable that there would be "explosion" as the case ruptures from the burning gases.

These batteries have fearsome energy densities and people keep wanting even more dense batteries, I wonder if they ever top to think about these things...

I know the risks and accept them, I also have continued to use a battery pack after crash since it was not (visibly) physically damaged (I do keep a *close* eye on it everytime I charge it though...) and know that this is an increased risk.


Trading Standards calls for online knife sale ban


education issue

Bah, make a nice tv-ad campaign where someone who actually knows anything about knife fighting explains a few facts:

1. There are no winners in a knife fight (you will be lucky to survive with wounds you can fix yourself) even if you know how to use the weapon properly

2. Especially stab wounds are *a bad thing*

3. Unless you actually have proper training you will mess up and cut yourself

Basically you don't get a knife for "defense", likely those you would like to defend against know a thing or two about street fighting, certainly enough to call your bluff (even if you would really intend to use the knife you wouldn't know how, thus it's a bluff), thus you made your situation worse...

While I know a few things about knife fighting (since to be able to defend unarmed against a knife you need to know how to properly use it as a weapon both against armed and unarmed opponents), I would not get into a knife fight even if I had a knife in hand: I'd throw it "away" (at the opponent) and hope the confusion gives me an opening to end the fight, in any case it continues unarmed for my part... Now if I would have a stick (canes are rather stylish right ? umbrellas work too) situation would be *very* different.


Texas cop tasers gobby granny


re knife

> If she'd been coming at him with a knife, even then it would have been wrong.



1. "there are no winners in a knife fight", don't get into those, there will be cut and stab wounds.

2. Knife is a very dangerous weapon even in amateur hands.

In fact if someone ever really attacked me with a knife I would end the fight real quick in the most efficient way available (as a civilian I don't carry firearms and the leatherman is not suitable for fighting so this means unarmed unless I happen to have something resembling a stick) and the attacker will be lucky to survive with repairable damage as there will be zero consideration for the attackers safety (ie. don't bother trying to avoid breaking joints or bones, don't worry about him hitting his face or other part of the head [this is potentially lethal] to whatever terrain features are at hand, and if the knife cannot be separated from the attacker it will be directed away from me: towards him...).

Even with the local *really* strict laws about "overuse of force in self defence" (which just about automatically considers everyone who has ever trained martial arts "overuse force" if they so much as touch the guy) knife or any other deadly weapon means just about anything is justifiable (kicking his face in when he was already incapacitated in the ground is not, though).

The whole "attackers safety" is bit weird concept, but that's the state of the law here, if someone comes at you with just their fists and boots you are expected to subdue then without causing damage (if you have a good reason why you could not simply run away), martial artists are supposed to be able to do this (even if they have only trained for a few months, which is absurd, I have trained little over ten years and still don't consider myself much of an artist), "regular joes" get small bit more leeway.



Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2017