Speculation; How will the next version of Disc DRM be?

[lightshadow]

Hi,

Now that a good chunk of the AACS DRM is by passed, I wonder how the next generation of DRM will be.

Bill Gates, have said that there will not be another disc format war like HD-DVD vs. Blu Ray that is going now right now. Eventhough Gates before have made slightly :) wrong predictions, I do think he is right on this one.

Movies in the future will be streamed over the net, and some sort of DRM that ensures that the content can only be played everytime you pay or on monthly basis.

CPU's will at that time clearly support secured memory that can only, untill broken :), be accessed by the DRM itsself.

But I can't help but wonder, if this sort of DRM is easier to break? I mean; everything is send though a well structured TCP/IP connection that is so easy to sniff.

So to me this seams like an easier task than todays DRM? Or am I missing something?

[plasmacutter]

i'm thinking once there are fully fledged gui programs that will decrypt hd-dvd/blu-ray a-la dvd decryptor or mactheripper they will abandon drm just like they did with early computer programs (dongles, etc).

theyve been hyping and pumping money into aacs for ages and now it's leaking like a seive and on the verge of complete collapse.

[MLS]

Huh? Dongles are still very much in use.

/MLS

[lightshadow]

i'm thinking once there are fully fledged gui programs that will decrypt hd-dvd/blu-ray a-la dvd decryptor or mactheripper they will abandon drm just like they did with early computer programs (dongles, etc).
I think programs like AutoCad/InRoads and Schematics still uses dongles.

Regarding the DRM part, I hope you are right, but I don't think it will happen=(

I think they (Hollywood and Microsoft) will not allow computers of the next gen media DRM to be able to play movies/music. I think they are working on only game consoles/entertainment centers (black boxs) to be able to play media.

They might not even contain a harddrive. Every movie gets streamed everytime, so nothing is kept on the users entertainment center.

theyve been hyping and pumping money into aacs for ages and now it's leaking like a seive and on the verge of complete collapse.
Well it does make one wonder if thay have done the math, and calculated how many movies than have to sell extra to pay for the AACS development.

First when the development of AACS and the maintainace is played, they start to profit :)

[HyperHacker]

The players come with a security guard.

At least, that's the only way it'll actually prevent copying. ;)

[b@nned]

anything that and be played/viewed can be copied end of story

[Mug Funky]

AFAIK AACS hasn't been broken yet in theory - all exploits to date have been due to implementations being unsecure. but AACS allows for that with revocations, so even though every disc out there can be decrypted now, in future (at least in theory) this will change.

what the recent bypassing of AACS has proven is that the community is very much up to the challenge.

AACS-LA want to play cat and mouse, but they've made themselves the mouse. revocation will be a minor inconvenience, but so long as we keep collecting VUKs (and the blu-ray counterparts), every disc will be decryptable eventually, and revocation will not change that once we have the VUKs.

then of course the day will (might?) come that someone finds an efficient brute-force attack that can be done in seconds. i wont hold my breath on that, but anything's possible :) people once said the Rubik's cube would never be solved...

[awhitehead]

Problem with ANY kind of video or audio DRM is very simple. At some point it has to play back content. It's very hard (if not impossible) to protect audio or video when the intended recipient/buyer is also the enemy aiming to bypass the DRM. At some point video has to be shown, and audio have to be played. Logical extreme of the current situation is forcing a consumer to get a brain implant, that would provide an end to end encrypted path between the content and the optical and auditory nerves. And then studios would worry about interception of the unencrypted nerve signals.

AACS in theory seems to be very robust. Problem with it (and with DRM) is a business model. In some ways, the fact that community bypassed the DRM is a bad thing, since DRM is pushed forward by the mistaken assumption that it will limit piracy and maximize profits. Now the DRM is bypassed, consumers (especially Hi-Tech savvy consumers, and early adopters) will start buying more HD content, generating a message that DRM is not a problem for consumer (people keep on buying), yet DRM is not strong enough (after all, those evil hackers found a flaw). This message is rather mixed, and that's a problem.

On the other hand, if the studios were to introduce a heavily protected DRM content, it would not work for most people, early adopters would lose money (because they would not be able to return their purchases), and at the same time generate bad will for the content producers, it is possible that content producers would get a message. If noone buys your product, obviously something is wrong, and even Sony knows that.

Then again, Jack Wallenti (sp?) never caught on. So likely none of the other people in power would get a clue either.

[Mug Funky]

If noone buys your product, obviously something is wrong, and even Sony knows that.


well... the latest sony flash players still support ATRAC over mpeg-4. i really don't think sony has a clue what's happening anymore.

about AACS - i don't doubt at least someone at AACS-LA has this site premanently bookmarked. it'd be stupid not to. these companies are by no means oblivious as to what's happening (and the motives behind it). it's more a matter of trying to protect the status quo - if DRM were abandoned they'd be out of jobs. of course, the crackers don't have that problem as they'll be doing the cracking on their own time.

i think at some point a balance will be struck, whether intentionally or not. there'll always be piracy, and there'll always be content restriction devices, and there'll always be consumers. it's the playoff between the three interests that makes things interesting :). further investment in DRM beyond a certain point will only be decreasing profits for the "content providers" (such a dry term), and eventually they may see that. on the other hand, piracy will also decrease profits. there should be a point somewhere in between that keeps the profits up and the consumers happy.

[linx05]

What happened to the news reports where if one key was found and exploited, the DVD Player will send out a signal to the companies and then update itself preventing use of that DVD.

(If I remember the news article correctly. It was posted on Doom9)

[lightshadow]

What happened to the news reports where if one key was found and exploited, the DVD Player will send out a signal to the companies and then update itself preventing use of that DVD.

(If I remember the news article correctly. It was posted on Doom9)
How should the play know, that it's key have been published?

It can't even work the other way around, where a server contacts the player, because many have firewalls.

It can only happen through newly purchased media that you put in to the player.

[Mug Funky]

i'm pretty sure media can't be revoked in AACS. if it can then it's a frightening thought - it's the digital equivalent of burning all copies of a particular book, which even if possible is a completely repugnant idea and justification enough for the kind of piracy AACS is supposed to prevent.

but anyway, i'm pretty sure content can't be revoked. there's been talk of it in various AACS related threads, but i'm not sure if there's any proof that it can actually happen. certainly it makes no sense from any point of view - it could only be used for censorship.

[lightshadow]

i'm pretty sure media can't be revoked in AACS. if it can then it's a frightening thought - it's the digital equivalent of burning all copies of a particular book, which even if possible is a completely repugnant idea and justification enough for the kind of piracy AACS is supposed to prevent.

but anyway, i'm pretty sure content can't be revoked. there's been talk of it in various AACS related threads, but i'm not sure if there's any proof that it can actually happen. certainly it makes no sense from any point of view - it could only be used for censorship.
That depends on how you look at it. Hollywood says that you don't buy the movie, but a licens.

So if they one day desides that the licens for a movie has expired, then that's they do. Hwo should stop them? =(

[linx05]

How should the play know, that it's key have been published?

It can't even work the other way around, where a server contacts the player, because many have firewalls.

It can only happen through newly purchased media that you put in to the player.
In this news article, they mentioned that the player is hooked up sort of like pay tv. Information can be sent to and from the player. I really wish I could find the article. Doom9 might know about it.

[Galileo2000]

So one day we will not be allowed to build or own computers.

Or like in Dune computers will be banned...

So nearly $1 trillion industry is going down to the toilet because a small bunch of the smart people just had figured out how to encrypt HD stuff.

I like sci-fi, but this scenario is just out of the madhouse.

Bottom line: will NOT happen.

[blutach]

Yes, I wonder where all this speculation is headed, too.

Seems more correct for it to be in one of our Announcements and Chat areas.

So, with posters' permission, I will move it to General Discussion.

Have fun.

Regards

[Shinigami-Sama]

So one day we will not be allowed to build or own computers.

Or like in Dune computers will be banned...

So nearly $1 trillion industry is going down to the toilet because a small bunch of the smart people just had figured out how to encrypt HD stuff.

I like sci-fi, but this scenario is just out of the madhouse.

Bottom line: will NOT happen.
ahh
butreilian jihad
wish I could spell >.>

but yeah, the next version I could make a guess that it be pretty much standalone devices play it, and more or less only a handful of countries will even try to stop it. Or the content industry suicides itself on this ideal and it'll be back to independents while big name labels walk off to the bankruptcy office after loosing to much in this fight.

[mpucoder]

Maybe I shouldn't post this because someone clueless to reality might read it. There is only one way to prevent media from being copied, and that is to keep it useable in a closed box. The mistake is allowing general purpose computers to have any access to the media. Only two things are required to copy encrypted data, a device physically capable of accessing data, and an application capable of exchanging the required keys. The protected path and all the hardware and BIOS changes being developed will not prevent circumvention. Why? Because the x86 architecture is capable of emulating itself, fooling any user application (note: not a program with supervisor level access) running in a virtual environment. The virtual environment can then obtain the correct responses to any api request and record it. If necessary two computers can be used. One an old unsecure computer which runs the virtual environment and the application that has the ability to access the data. To the application it appears to be a new secure computer as it responds correctly to any request. The other computer is a new secure one, and runs an application to make requests to it that are passed on from the old computers emulation. This application appears to be a player to the new computer, as it responds exactly as it should.

[lightshadow]

Maybe I shouldn't post this because someone clueless to reality might read it. There is only one way to prevent media from being copied, and that is to keep it useable in a closed box. The mistake is allowing general purpose computers to have any access to the media. Only two things are required to copy encrypted data, a device physically capable of accessing data, and an application capable of exchanging the required keys. The protected path and all the hardware and BIOS changes being developed will not prevent circumvention. Why? Because the x86 architecture is capable of emulating itself, fooling any user application (note: not a program with supervisor level access) running in a virtual environment. The virtual environment can then obtain the correct responses to any api request and record it. If necessary two computers can be used. One an old unsecure computer which runs the virtual environment and the application that has the ability to access the data. To the application it appears to be a new secure computer as it responds correctly to any request. The other computer is a new secure one, and runs an application to make requests to it that are passed on from the old computers emulation. This application appears to be a player to the new computer, as it responds exactly as it should.
I see your point, but that requires the old computer to be able to emulate the challange/response auth. and it can't do that before the DRM is broken.

[setarip_old]

If, with the advent of the next disc format (If there is to be yet another), the studios and manufacturers (hardware and burnable media) were willing to forego the additional income and simply not make burners and burnable media for said format, my guess would be that there would be a drastic reduction in our ability to backup (hardcopy) our purchased commercial media.

The operable phrase in this hypothesis is, of course, manufacturers (hardware and burnable media) were willing to forego the additional income;>}

[mpucoder]

You don't need to break the drm to access the data. The technique uses 2 emulators talking to each other over ethernet or usb. Requests and replies are relayed. In the old unsecure computer the emulated environment appears to be a secure machine, so the player is satisfied and will attempt to play the movie. In the secure machine an application which passes all tests for an authentic player stands in for the player.

In a well developed security system using zero-knowledge authentication this technique would not break the protection in the sense that you no longer need the 2 computers, they would be needed for every copy attempt. This is because we do not know the actual key or algorithm for the rolling codes which good systems (including garage door openers) use. The correct response to a challenge can only be given if the key and algorithm are known.

Bottom line, encryption and security only works if the parties being excluded from the unencrypted data have no access to the decryption process or keys.

[mpucoder]

@setarip_old - allow us to play movies but not make movies? That would not go over well at all. Besides personal computers there are also DVD recorders and camcorders. These devices can be used with "stabilizers" or time base correctors today to record analog sdtv, I'm sure consumers will demand HD recorders and camcorders as well.

From what I have seen over the years is that equipment manufacturers care more about their own profit than the RIAA or MPAA companies' profits. In the early days copying cdda was difficult because the readers could not accurately position to a given sector. For reading data many sectors were read by the system and the correct one returned to the caller. Copying audio had a lot of "jitter", repeated sectors caused by the poor positioning, and required software to piece the songs together. The hardware industry responded with firmware upgrades that allowed perfect copying.

[FoxDisc]

i'm pretty sure media can't be revoked in AACS.

You are wrong. The AACS specs define a Host Revocation List (HRL - the software player), a Drive Revocation List (DRL - the optical drive that reads the disk) and a Content Revocation List (CRL - the actual content on the disc). All of section 2.7 of the prerecorded spec is devoted to the CRL and how content can be revoked.

[setarip_old]

@mpucoder

Hi!From what I have seen over the years is that equipment manufacturers care more about their own profitThat's precisely what I was indicating when I saidThe operable phrase in this hypothesis is, of course, if manufacturers (hardware and burnable media) were willing to forego the additional income;>}

[HyperHacker]

Even if you can't buy burners and blank discs for the next format, there will still be discs you can buy big enough to hold a copy. They may not play in standalone players (though I suspect they'd be similar enough that firmware hacking would allow it), but you'd be able to copy them one way or another. Even if there are no drives for a computer to even read them, the video could still be extracted from a standalone player.

In short, as mentioned before: If you can watch it, you can copy it.

[shevegen]

The next version will be chip-in-brain plus a potential mini-explosive device.
The ads will be no-more DRM needed, for obvious reasons.

The reasoning for its implementation will of course
be "anti-terror control mechanisms".

And if you dont behave properly you will be out of business.
(doom9 will probably be the first victim)

But more realistically ;-)

I believe they want to monitor the money routes, find
and use richer areas, and get in enough advertisement for a critical
consumer mass. ;-)

I dont think it will be payed / month JUST for the video
stuff, not enough people love to do that. BUT if its coupled with
more advantages, like shopping mall benefits, other benefits
etc.. then i think it WILL be feasible for
a "richer" (rich as in has enough money to buy that stuff) target
audience. This already works for the shopping malls and
with the credit cards mania, mobile phones getting more
and more popular, this all looks like a business model
that can work.

DRM, and I can tell you from my personal experience with my windoze
using friends, though is a concept consumers dont really like. My friends
are still "rather" young and can change their behaviour, unlike elderly
people who are much more subject to getting bullied by the DRM
crap ... :)

The biggest problem I see with the new burners + discs is that they
are more expensive. Thats really a big issue I see right now.
Also people have had bad experience with scratched DVDs and
crippled backup-rights.

[mpucoder]

About burners - we started off without the ability to burn DVDs so we compressed and stripped down to CD size. Then DVD burners came along, but no dual layer, so we again compressed and stripped down.

[joseph5]

The players come with a security guard.

At least, that's the only way it'll actually prevent copying. ;)YOu can always bribe the guard, or put sleeping pills in his food.:p

[billqs]

The obvious answer to widespread piracy isn't new and better DRM it's cheap prices for the discs! If the discs are priced inexpensively enough the demand for pirating would be much lower, except for the doing it because we can crowd.

[HyperHacker]

Precisely. Media companies need to make buying real discs more attractive than piracy - piracy being illegal isn't enough reason not to do it for many people. High prices are another push toward the swashbuckling route, and invasive/restrictive DRM (especially the completely pointless type, like disabling the fast-forward button on DVDs) is yet another reason to sail the seven seas. Piracy is not a very attractive option for many people, but when buying the real thing is an even less attractive option, there's a problem! CDs mainly had no DRM, and they did just fine, because for a (usually) reasonable price you bought some music and could rip it to your hard drive or portable player, burn backup copies and/or mix discs, etc.

People will pay for convenience. This is why you can sell individual pop cans for $1.00 when a case of 12 costs $4.00 at the grocery store and even that vending machine down the street has them for 75 cents. Make real media more convenient than pirated media, and people will buy it. And that shouldn't be hard to do, because let's face it, pirating media is a pain in the butt even for experienced users, let alone Joe Public who can barely read his email and keeps a blanket over his monitor when not in use to prevent the government spying on him. ;)