Welcome to Doom9's Forum, THE in-place to be for everyone interested in DVD conversion.

Before you start posting please read the forum rules. By posting to this forum you agree to abide by the rules.

 

Go Back   Doom9's Forum > Video Encoding > MPEG-4 AVC / H.264

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 13th December 2008, 15:31   #21  |  Link
LoRd_MuldeR
Software Developer
 
LoRd_MuldeR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Last House on Slunk Street
Posts: 12,823
"Protecting" your code only makes sense if you either...

(1) plan to sell your software commercially
(2) need to hide your algorithms from your antagonist (e.g. decryption software)
(3) want to hide malware in your software

In case (1) you could simply buy a license for one of the commercial executable protectors/obfuscators (e.g. ASProtect).
That still won't give a "safe" protection, of course. But I'm sure it will be at least as hard to crack as your own protection. And it saves you trouble/work.
Also since many (commercial) applications are protected with such tools, the chance that any A/V software will complain is very low.

Case (2) certainly doesn't apply to a H.264 decoder, so I have to speculate that we have a case (3) here...
__________________
There was of course no way of knowing whether you were being watched at any given moment.
How often, or on what system, the Thought Police plugged in on any individual wire was guesswork.



Last edited by LoRd_MuldeR; 13th December 2008 at 15:37.
LoRd_MuldeR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th December 2008, 15:52   #22  |  Link
CruNcher
Registered User
 
CruNcher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Germany
Posts: 4,950
These "Protection" Software they sell is bogus you can always disassemble the code, it's just money making same for all the other Commercial Protection Systems like Securom ,StarForce and others they just ad another layer of "imaginative Protection" we don't talk about the normal usage scenarios though here that justifies (in the eyes of the creators) these rootkit like systems, we talk about protection added so nobody can RE his code but that is impossible with the current computer hardware, so the competition of him will know how to do it he can't protect it it's not logic. And yes for a guy that does Assembly Coding and a thing like a H.264 Decoder it's strange, though CoreAVC and others do it too and they also know what they do (or don't sometimes i have the feeling it just makes them feel better todo anything than nothing even if it's absolute useless) but i would never pay for this wannabe protection or protect @ all as it makes absolutely no sense if someone wants to RE it he can as long as it's executed it can't be protected on current computer Hardware.
__________________
all my compares are riddles so please try to decipher them yourselves :)

It is about Time

Join the Revolution NOW before it is to Late !

http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=168004

Last edited by CruNcher; 13th December 2008 at 15:56.
CruNcher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th December 2008, 15:54   #23  |  Link
Guest
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 21,924
Let's stay on topic, please.
Guest is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th December 2008, 17:07   #24  |  Link
schweinsz
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 496
Quote:
Originally Posted by LoRd_MuldeR View Post
"Protecting" your code only makes sense if you either...

(1) plan to sell your software commercially
(2) need to hide your algorithms from your antagonist (e.g. decryption software)
(3) want to hide malware in your software

In case (1) you could simply buy a license for one of the commercial executable protectors/obfuscators (e.g. ASProtect).
That still won't give a "safe" protection, of course. But I'm sure it will be at least as hard to crack as your own protection. And it saves you trouble/work.
Also since many (commercial) applications are protected with such tools, the chance that any A/V software will complain is very low.

Case (2) certainly doesn't apply to a H.264 decoder, so I have to speculate that we have a case (3) here...
IMHO, commercial executable protectors/obfuscators what you recommend is bad. Themida is pretty good, but I have seen many themida-protected examples are cracked. The commercial protectors are researched deeply and a experieced cracker can crack it very easily. I am very familar with many kinds of anti-debug skills, so I do it myself and I can integrated it into the DiAVC closely. Then I protect some critical functions using the VMProtect.

I never hide some malwares in the DiAVC, I have engaged in the software for several months and I want to sell it online in future, I will never risk my business.
schweinsz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th December 2008, 17:26   #25  |  Link
LoRd_MuldeR
Software Developer
 
LoRd_MuldeR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Last House on Slunk Street
Posts: 12,823
Quote:
Originally Posted by schweinsz View Post
I never hide some malwares in the DiAVC
As long as you keep your codes in private and protect/obfuscate your binaries we can't prove that statement (easily).
But that applies to most commercial software...

Quote:
I have engaged in the software for several months and I want to sell it online in future, I will never risk my business.
So if your really plan to sell your software commercially, protection makes sense indeed.
But you should check your protected binaries at http://virustotal.com/ to avoid false positives and confusion.
Also I'd recommend to test your binaries with DEP enabled...
__________________
There was of course no way of knowing whether you were being watched at any given moment.
How often, or on what system, the Thought Police plugged in on any individual wire was guesswork.


LoRd_MuldeR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th December 2008, 18:29   #26  |  Link
CruNcher
Registered User
 
CruNcher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Germany
Posts: 4,950
Quote:
Originally Posted by LoRd_MuldeR View Post
As long as you keep your codes in private and protect/obfuscate your binaries we can't prove that statement (easily).
But that applies to most commercial software...

So if your really plan to sell your software commercially, protection makes sense indeed.
But you should check your protected binaries at http://virustotal.com/ to avoid false positives and confusion.
Also I'd recommend to test your binaries with DEP enabled...
Imho it makes 0 sense and just highers his costs without any usefulness.
VMProtect is also another of these security layers that's imho useless, but yeah Virtualization the new Buzzword so i need it
Btw there is more then DEP they're lot of 3rd Party behavioral analyzers some of them will also go into alert mode but he's gonna see that from his customers feedback soon enough, you just run after something which can't exist on current hardware and that as a knowledgeable person is highly non logic
Though how he writes shows what his main intention is "Business" so good luck vs your competition especially CoreCodec and DivX you should have joined ffmpeg and invest your potential energy into there then to waste it like this schweinsz (it's never to late ), of course that's your personal decision, nevertheless i wish you good luck and im out.
Don't want to be responsible if Donald get's a heart attack, sometimes going of topic is unavoidable especially as in this case the thread starter is promoting something so i assumed he's also interested in general ideas and views about his future Software Product (from his Potential Con/Pro Customers)
__________________
all my compares are riddles so please try to decipher them yourselves :)

It is about Time

Join the Revolution NOW before it is to Late !

http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=168004

Last edited by CruNcher; 13th December 2008 at 19:09.
CruNcher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th December 2008, 23:41   #27  |  Link
Atak_Snajpera
RipBot264 author
 
Atak_Snajpera's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Poland
Posts: 6,240
if very efficient Divx h.264 decoder will be released for free I see no reason to pay for DiAVC or coreavc. You won't earn to much money.
Atak_Snajpera is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th December 2008, 23:52   #28  |  Link
LoRd_MuldeR
Software Developer
 
LoRd_MuldeR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Last House on Slunk Street
Posts: 12,823
Quote:
Originally Posted by Atak_Snajpera View Post
if very efficient Divx h.264 decoder will be released for free I see no reason to pay for DiAVC or coreavc. You won't earn to much money.
And don't forget that ffmpeg-MT and ffdshow-MT are on the way! So hopefully we won't need any commercial ClosedSource H.264 decoder at all

On my system ffdshow-MT already achieves ~80% of the throughput of DivX's H.264 decoder:
http://forum.doom9.org/showpost.php?...0&postcount=34

That's definitely fast enough for smooth real-time 1080p playback with pure software decoding. What do we want more?
__________________
There was of course no way of knowing whether you were being watched at any given moment.
How often, or on what system, the Thought Police plugged in on any individual wire was guesswork.


LoRd_MuldeR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th December 2008, 23:58   #29  |  Link
Atak_Snajpera
RipBot264 author
 
Atak_Snajpera's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Poland
Posts: 6,240
Quote:
On my system ffdshow-MT already achieves ~80% of the throughput of DivX's H.264 decoder:
http://forum.doom9.org/showpost.php?...0&postcount=34

That's definitely fast enough for smooth real-time 1080p playback with pure software decoding. What do we want more?
Good news! I always prefer ffdshow less decoders in system = less problems
Atak_Snajpera is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14th December 2008, 00:33   #30  |  Link
ChronoCross
Does it really matter?
 
ChronoCross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 1,542
I think I'll pass on a decoder that seems to have no actual benefit other than to possibly hide malware. Besides CoreAVC already works quite well for me, is professionally written, support, has a website that actually contains more than an archive and doesn't send my virus scanning program into a panic attack.

Anyway good luck but your pretty much just wasting your time.
ChronoCross is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14th December 2008, 01:26   #31  |  Link
Shinigami-Sama
Solaris: burnt by the Sun
 
Shinigami-Sama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: /etc/default/moo
Posts: 1,923
nod32 says its clean but I don't really feel like testing it anyways
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by benjust View Post
interlacing and telecining should have been but a memory long ago.. unfortunately still just another bizarre weapon in the industries war on image quality.
Shinigami-Sama is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14th December 2008, 04:06   #32  |  Link
Ranguvar
Registered User
 
Ranguvar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: ::1
Posts: 1,236
Interesting, but no thanks I have no need for a closed-source decoder, and I don't think I'm far off in thinking that the only reason many others on this forum do is because they want/need very high speed, which neuron2's GPU decoder offers. That said, I would suggest that you either open-source your filter (why closed-source if you don't plan to sell it? Or do you?), so any improvements you find can be shared among the community and all software is helped by it, or you make going closed-source viable - FAST decoding, even faster than the current fastest, which is neuron2's solution.
Ranguvar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14th December 2008, 04:12   #33  |  Link
LoRd_MuldeR
Software Developer
 
LoRd_MuldeR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Last House on Slunk Street
Posts: 12,823
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ranguvar View Post
That said, I would suggest that you either open-source your filter (why closed-source if you don't plan to sell it? Or do you?), so any improvements you find can be shared among the community and all software is helped by it, or you make going closed-source viable - FAST decoding, even faster than the current fastest, which is neuron2's solution.
He already made clear that he is planning to sell it. And it's still his decision what to do with his own work!

Sure he will have strong competitors, in the ClosedSource world and in the OpenSource world. But if he wants to take the challenge, why not?
__________________
There was of course no way of knowing whether you were being watched at any given moment.
How often, or on what system, the Thought Police plugged in on any individual wire was guesswork.



Last edited by LoRd_MuldeR; 14th December 2008 at 04:28.
LoRd_MuldeR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14th December 2008, 05:10   #34  |  Link
Ranguvar
Registered User
 
Ranguvar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: ::1
Posts: 1,236
Alright, but still, all I was offering is advice He of course does not have to follow my recommendations, they may very well be bad. IMO the only way he can compete in the payware world is to leverage GPU decoding. There are many big-name decoders, with big backing, so he needs to differentiate himself. Offering the _real_ fastest decoding is one way, and I don't think it's possible to do that without leveraging the GPU in some way. CPU fallback, sure, but GPU decoding must be implemented. He could even use libavcodec-MT for the CPU decoding (seems fairly safe legally), since it's LGPL, and contribute if he needs more speed - surely that would be faster than writing a CPU decoder from scratch?

Last edited by Ranguvar; 14th December 2008 at 05:13.
Ranguvar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14th December 2008, 06:26   #35  |  Link
Sagekilla
x264aholic
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: New York
Posts: 1,752
@Ranguvar: Leveraging the GPU for helping decode is already done in a lot of free decoders though. So why should a consumer buy his product if they can get GPU based decoding for free? Yes, having GPU decoding would help improve the product, but the best way to differentiate from all the other decoders is to offer very fast software decoding and GPU based decoding.
__________________
You can't call your encoding speed slow until you start measuring in seconds per frame.
Sagekilla is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14th December 2008, 06:58   #36  |  Link
roozhou
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,181
I am looking for a GPU based dshow decoder that is able to put decoded frames back to main memory. DGAVCDecNV has only avisynth interface and cannot work with other demuxers. MPC-HC/Cyberlink only works in DxVA.
roozhou is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14th December 2008, 11:22   #37  |  Link
Casshern
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 220
OK, i give it a try

Quote:
Originally Posted by schweinsz View Post
No, I never mean that the DiAVC is 5 times faster than the coreavc. The 19Mbps is tested using the bitstream of resolution 1280x720 generated by JM13.0 using the CABAC and Hierarchical B frames. But the 4Mbps bistream is downloaded from the internet and It is 1920x1088 and I dont know the detail about it. The 70% CPU fullness includes the audio decoding, video decoding and rendering.

I never use any open source in the DiAVC. The code-obfuscation
is to hide the anti-debug "int 2dh". I never insert virus in the DiAVC because I want to sell it online in future.

Now I have deleted any anti-debug code in the DiAVC. You can try it.
Judging from this and other posts, you are pretty open about your code. GOOD! I take some of my reservations back and might actually try it.

regards,

Casshern
Casshern is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14th December 2008, 11:43   #38  |  Link
Doom9
clueless n00b
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: somewhere over the rainbow
Posts: 10,570
Why is it that even after a moderator asks everybody to get back to topic the next 14 posts are still off topic?
__________________
For the web's most comprehensive collection of DVD backup guides go to www.doom9.org
Doom9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14th December 2008, 11:57   #39  |  Link
Sagittaire
Testeur de codecs
 
Sagittaire's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: France
Posts: 2,413
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doom9 View Post
Why is it that even after a moderator asks everybody to get back to topic the next 14 posts are still off topic?
Yes really curious wellcome ... lol
- Virus contamination suspicions
- Open Source hack suspicions with always the same stupid speech on open source (M$ is devil ... blablabla)

It's really secondary question but the decoder work correctly ... lol
__________________
Le Sagittaire ... ;-)

1- Ateme AVC or x264
2- VP7 or RV10 only for anime
3- XviD, DivX or WMV9
Sagittaire is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14th December 2008, 12:19   #40  |  Link
Dark Shikari
x264 developer
 
Dark Shikari's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 8,690
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sagittaire View Post
Yes really curious wellcome ... lol
- Virus contamination suspicions
Surely it's reasonable for there to be suspicions of a virus when a nobody posts on the forum with his new tool--a tool which sets off antivirus scans and has an executable stack? It's been confirmed to be fine now, of course--as it was just overzealous attempts at stopping debuggers--but it was surely not an unreasonable worry to begin with.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sagittaire View Post
- Open Source hack suspicions with always the same stupid speech on open source
You had a point until...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sagittaire View Post
(M$ is devil ... blablabla)
Stop it with the strawmen. Nobody, even in the off-topic posts, mentioned "Microsoft," according to a quick grep. You're only getting the thread even further off-topic by bringing up such tangential topics.

Last edited by Dark Shikari; 14th December 2008 at 12:21.
Dark Shikari is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
avc, diavc, fastest decoder, h.264, software

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 16:17.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions Inc.