View Single Post
Old 24th August 2008, 20:16   #11  |  Link
Oopho2ei
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Quote:
Originally Posted by gioowe View Post
I don't think that. Or you can never create new hardware players or software players that can decode the first released BD+ disks. And if e.g. each certain data has to be at a specific location for all known and future player then there's no point. That's not a footprint.
To be honest i don't understand what you are trying to say. Also i can't follow the way you try to argue that slysoft reverse engineered a hardware player instead of a specific software player to uncover the secrets of BD+. The code which is run on the virtual machine needs to be able to interfere with the decryption process and therefor BD+ imposes some restrictions on the way the memory is organized. But as Peer pointed out in his previous posting those restrictions are rather small.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Peer van Heuen View Post
No, that's not it (I thought we were past that silly memory dumping era anyway, that only works for badly written security code ). This foot-/fingerprint stuff is only a very minor part of BD+ and what you're saying would be rather trivial.
It was the best i could think of with my very limited knowledge about BD+. For an open source implementation the VM would have to be fully reverse engineered anyway. I will get a BD+ movie and see what the players do.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Peer van Heuen View Post
Actually you'd have to know how BD+ really works, to know what I meant (and even then you probably wouldn't ).
But if I start unraveling that, I'd be finding myself looking for a new job by next week

So, I'll better shut up from this point on - should have done that in the first place, sorry...
Thank you for your help.

Last edited by Oopho2ei; 25th August 2008 at 08:13.
  Reply With Quote