New Decrypting Method

[SamuriHL]

Wishful thinking, perhaps, but, we can hope. I really hope they just stop all this nonsense and let us back up our DVDs without hassle, but, that's REALLY wishful thinking. :) Then again, placing hope as I do on PathPlayer and AI Scanner technologies to end this nonsense is also wishful thinking on my part, most likely.

[Wombler]

However, just focussing on pathplaying/AI for the minute, an upfront scan alone of menu buttons (found in the navpacks of menu VOBs) and PGCs (found in the IFOs) is bound to fail where menus are authored into the titles domain (which is not at all unusual, espeically for special features). Then, the program is required to scan all the VOBs first to find BOVs and so build a picture of the full disk. This can only be done after the VOBs have been ripped.


Ahh that explains something I'd wondered about.

When you rip certain discs with PathPlayer then load them up in PgcEdit, PgcEdit still finds loads of uncalled PGCs that can be safely removed but only takes seconds to find them.

I'd wondered why if they were that easy to find that PathPlayer hadn't removed them already.


Wombler

[Wombler]

Based on a quick search that I just performed, it appears that you are correct...

Yeah I think it first appeared quite a while ago on 'Das Parfum' or something like that.

I don't speak German so I didn't bother buying this disc despite the technical interest.

It's only the most recent variant of ProtectDVD that has prompted and possibly necessitated new techniques.


Wombler

[Wombler]

It seems to me, that based on the recent successful updates of some rippers that are now apparently able to deal with the overall concept of "ProtectDVD Video", it will be quite some time before yet another new concept protection scheme shows up for DVDs.

That's always hard to tell as every time decrypting software is updated then that revised software becomes the specific target that they seek to circumvent.

The fact that there have been so many updates required over the last year or so by all the companies with decrypting products is in some way testament to that.


I'm certainly not an expert in the field of encrypting DVDs but, based on the above, it may just be that we've seen the last of the DVD protection concepts.


That certainly is possible but with the goal posts being such a moving target I'm certainly glad that they've developed (what I feel will ultimately be) a better technique to fall back on.


Therefore, at least for the near term, I can't see any direct or immediate additional benefit arising from the creation of either "PathPlayer" or "AI Scanner". The programs incorporating these methods may just prove to be alternatives to already-existing solutions.

Perhaps we'll all smile if, based on the most recent change regarding "PathPlayer" (Will not be activated unless "normal" ripping fails), it never has to be activated ;>}


Ironically PathPlayer et al might make this a self fulfilling prophesy as they might not bother introducing new protections that can be circumvented with software using now existing AI techniques.

What they're really after are methods that block all types of decryption software but this is in my mind a fruitless and at best temporary solution.

I must admit I do find the battle of wits interesting though. :)


Wombler

[blutach]

@wombler - having uncalled PGCs does not always mean there are BOVs that call them. In fact, for some reason, most commercial DVDs are authored "inefficiently".

Regards

[SamuriHL]

@wombler - having uncalled PGCs does not always mean there are BOVs that call them. In fact, for some reason, most commercial DVDs are authored "inefficiently".

Regards

That's absolutely true. There are several DVDs out there that have PGCs that have no BOVs at all. Some are intentional.

[HyperHacker]

What they're really after are methods that block all types of decryption software but this is in my mind a fruitless and at best temporary solution.Problem is, players are decryption software. :p

[Wombler]

@wombler - having uncalled PGCs does not always mean there are BOVs that call them. In fact, for some reason, most commercial DVDs are authored "inefficiently".

Regards

Cheers Blutach but I wasn't actually thinking of it that way. I was looking at it the opposite way around and I'm sure you'll keep me right on this.

I was assuming that uncalled PGCs were those that are not called via BOVs or other methods.

It just seemed strange to me that if the AI scan is purportedly following all the playable paths that some uncalled (never played) stuff makes it through.

Am I over simplifying things here or have I missed something obvious?


Wombler

[blutach]

No. An uncalled PGC is one that is not referenced by another PGC or a button (menu/BOV/remote).

Almost every commercial DVD has uncalled PGCs - sometimes 100s of them - even 1000s on ARccOS DVDs.

Regards

[Wombler]

No. An uncalled PGC is one that is not referenced by another PGC or a button (menu/BOV/remote).

Almost every commercial DVD has uncalled PGCs - sometimes 100s of them - even 1000s on ARccOS DVDs.

Regards

Got it! :)

Thanks for that.

Yeah I've got into the habit now of scanning all rips with PgcEdit before I do anything else.

As you say it's amazing the amount of stuff it can eliminate on certain discs.


Wombler

[SamuriHL]

For those that are interested, it seems Slysoft has released their new version. Enjoy!

[setarip_old]

And now the countdown begins - to see if or when the new technology of both AnyDVD and DVFab HD Decrypter will actually HAVE to be called into play due to the creation of yet another new copy protection concept...

[SamuriHL]

We shall see. From what I can see, this new beta version seems quite impressive. Very powerful.

[setarip_old]

I'm at a loss to understand the following:

If, as of today, ALL known copy protection schemes have been successfully dealt with by the likes of DVD95Copy, DVDFab HD Decrypter without using "PathPlayer" and, presumably, AnyDVD without "AI Scanner" - how has anybody determined the effectiveness of either "PathPlayer" or "AI Scanner"?

[jeanl]

They're effective, once they come up with updates!!! :D :D
But look at the change history, every release there's a fix for a "new protection scheme"! Presumably, they need a more future-proof solution, like the one in ripit4me!
Jeanl

[setarip_old]

@jeanl

My point is, how can anyone state that these "new technologies" are any more effective than the present versions of decrypters, when the present decrypters are, as of today, capable of handling ALL presently existing protection schemes?

These technologies, which appear to be suggesting that they use A.I. and would, therefore, automatically adapt to new protection schemes, would first have to be able to overcome a copy protection scheme that foils the present decrypters, as proof that they, in fact, provide new and additional capabilities via this concept of tracing.

If, without "fixes", they prove to provide just a different way to decrypt the same DVDs, then in my estimation, they will have been proven to be a failed concept.

[Wombler]

@jeanl

My point is, how can anyone state that these "new technologies" are any more effective than the present versions of decrypters, when the present decrypters are, as of today, capable of handling ALL presently existing protection schemes?

These technologies, which appear to be suggesting that they use A.I. and would, therefore, automatically adapt to new protection schemes, would first have to be able to overcome a copy protection scheme that foils the present decrypters, as proof that they, in fact, provide new and additional capabilities via this concept of tracing.

If, without "fixes", they prove to provide just a different way to decrypt the same DVDs, then in my estimation, they will have been proven to be a failed concept.

I think the point is that AI techniques inherently overcome schemes that foil present decrypters (including variants of current protections yet to emerge).

In other words they've moved the goal posts substantially and simultaneously reduced the potential need for updates as pointed out by Jeanl.

As a concept I can't see anything wrong with this.

Whether it ultimately fails in practice is a different matter but I think that's extremely unlikely given the dedication and determination of the various programmers.

Slysoft and Fengtao/Ting are extremely expert in this field and if both independently come up with a similar solution then you can be certain at least that it's a valid concept.


Wombler

[setarip_old]

In other words they've moved the goal posts substantially and simultaneously reduced the potential need for updatesAs I've already stated, there is absolutely no evidence of this at the present time.Whether it ultimately fails in practice is a different matterNo, it's ALL that matters. What value is a new decrypter concept if it "ultimately doesn't work?

[Wombler]

As I've already stated, there is absolutely no evidence of this at the present time...

There isn't any evidence that it won't work either.

Time will tell.


Wombler

[setarip_old]

The following is a quote from earlier in this thread, regarding AnyDVD with "AI Scanner:From what I can see, this new beta version seems quite impressive. Very powerful.The inference from such a statement would be that it has been proven capable of doing things that earlier versions (of AnyDVD and/or other decrypters) couldn't.
I raised my question in response to that statement -and I still would ask:

How can anyone state that these "new technologies" are any more effective than the present versions of decrypters, when the present decrypters are, as of today, capable of handling ALL presently existing protection schemes?

These new concepts can only be evaluated when a new protection scheme arises, that cannot be dealt with by today's versions of existing decrypters.

[linx05]

setarip_old, copy-protection schemes can be validated when using only the AI Scanner or PathPlayer. If the present copy-protection can be broken with either versions, then it may hold a good chance at defeating new ones.

[blutach]

The scanner technology is what formed the backbone of RipIt4Me, which worked spectacularly well at getting round schemes because it acted like a real DVD player. Usually RipIt4Me got round new protections within hours of them emerging and in many instances, RipIt4Me needed no updates to handle new protection schemes. I credit the scanner technology for this.

SlySoft and Fengtao are now adopting this idea, so I can only see it helping.

Regards

[bourtzovlakas]

Better compatibility with existing transcoding programs(even on-the-fly) might also be a benefit from the new approach....

For example, AnyDVD handles almost every new protection scheme, by using the ripper function...
...but, on-the-fly function still lacks compatibility with DVD Shrink....

Also, Fengtao said somewhere that the new approach produces a "cleaner" output overall...

[SamuriHL]

I'm at a loss to understand the following:

If, as of today, ALL known copy protection schemes have been successfully dealt with by the likes of DVD95Copy, DVDFab HD Decrypter without using "PathPlayer" and, presumably, AnyDVD without "AI Scanner" - how has anybody determined the effectiveness of either "PathPlayer" or "AI Scanner"?

Because AnyDVD was not updated to handle the latest protections as found on Blade HoC, Full of It, and a few others. The Scanner was used instead.

[SamuriHL]

The following is a quote from earlier in this thread, regarding AnyDVD with "AI Scanner:The inference from such a statement would be that it has been proven capable of doing things that earlier versions (of AnyDVD and/or other decrypters) couldn't.
I raised my question in response to that statement -and I still would ask:

How can anyone state that these "new technologies" are any more effective than the present versions of decrypters, when the present decrypters are, as of today, capable of handling ALL presently existing protection schemes?

These new concepts can only be evaluated when a new protection scheme arises, that cannot be dealt with by today's versions of existing decrypters.


Once again, AnyDVD was *NOT* updated to handle protections released in the last few weeks. instead they rely on the Scanner to deal with them. And it works.

[setarip_old]

The first time statement that the "AI Scanner" technology properly processed the likes of "Blade - House of Chthon" is encouraging.

As stated by "Wombler":Time will tell.And, as I said:And now the countdown begins - to see if or when the new technology of both AnyDVD and DVFab HD Decrypter will actually HAVE to be called into play due to the creation of yet another new copy protection concept...

[SamuriHL]

That is certainly possible. Slysoft said in the release notes that this new version of AnyDVD was basically a large rewrite. It seems that they don't want to deal with updating the old heuristics scanner any more and feel that the AI Scanner will be the future of ripping for them. I agree with the time will tell statement as no one can know for sure what kinds of copy protection junk they'll dream up next. I'm sure the game of cat and mouse will probably continue. But who knows...maybe we won't need as many updates. Look at R4M...that hasn't been updated in months and is still going strong minus one protection scheme. That's a pretty good record IMO.

[setarip_old]

Look at R4M...that hasn't been updated in months and is still going strong minus one protection scheme. That's a pretty good record IMO.Absolutely!

[SamuriHL]

One thing I just want to clarify as I don't think it's obvious. In DVDFab, the PathPlayer technology, by default, is only used when it runs into a disc it can't rip. By default in AnyDVD, the AI Scanner is used on all copy protected discs. Even on "older" discs that the heuristics engine already dealt with. You can, of course, turn the AI Scanner off and use the old heuristics engine, but, by default the new version of AnyDVD is *ALWAYS* using the AI Scanner.

[Wombler]

The scanner technology is what formed the backbone of RipIt4Me, which worked spectacularly well at getting round schemes because it acted like a real DVD player. Usually RipIt4Me got round new protections within hours of them emerging and in many instances, RipIt4Me needed no updates to handle new protection schemes. I credit the scanner technology for this.

SlySoft and Fengtao are now adopting this idea, so I can only see it helping.

Regards

I've nothing but admiration for RipIt4Me and all those associated with it.

It's a testament to how good this program was that it's still coping admirably with almost all titles.

A superb piece of programming in my mind.


Wombler

[SamuriHL]

I have to agree. It's a brilliant piece of programming that has stood the test of time. No other piece of software to date can say that.

[Wombler]

Better compatibility with existing transcoding programs(even on-the-fly) might also be a benefit from the new approach....

For example, AnyDVD handles almost every new protection scheme, by using the ripper function...
...but, on-the-fly function still lacks compatibility with DVD Shrink....

Also, Fengtao said somewhere that the new approach produces a "cleaner" output overall...

Very good points.

Additional functionality and features such as these make the new versions winners irrespective of eagerly anticipated ripping improvements.


Wombler

[SamuriHL]

The AI Scanner has increased OTF functionality with DVD Shrink. It's still not perfect, but, a lot of ARccOS protected titles that Shrink had issues with can now be opened directly. That's definitely a good thing. There are some titles that still have issues. For instance, Blade House of Chthon can be opened directly with Shrink, but, the output is screwed up. So, it's not perfect, but, it's improving.

[Wombler]

One thing I just want to clarify as I don't think it's obvious. In DVDFab, the PathPlayer technology, by default, is only used when it runs into a disc it can't rip. By default in AnyDVD, the AI Scanner is used on all copy protected discs. Even on "older" discs that the heuristics engine already dealt with. You can, of course, turn the AI Scanner off and use the old heuristics engine, but, by default the new version of AnyDVD is *ALWAYS* using the AI Scanner.

I'd like to see PathPlayer reach the stage where it's reliable, effective and quick enough to be the default ripping method.

Slysofts approach is impressive though and I like the idea of the ripping on the fly approach.

Out of curiosity when ripping to hard disk with the latest beta of AnyDVD is the overall ripping time any longer with AI Scanner turned on compared to when it's turned off?

Or in other words is there an overhead associated with using AI Scanner?


Wombler

[SamuriHL]

No, it's incredibly fast. And it has a caching mechanism so that when you put a disc in, it's scanned, and the results are cache so the next time you put the disc in it doesn't have to rescan it. Once the disc is scanned(and I've not seen any take more than 10 seconds personally, but, there probably are some out there that take longer), ripping is no faster or slower than it was before.

As for pathplayer, i hope it keeps evolving, as well. The more options out there that don't need to be constantly updated the better off everyone is.

[Wombler]

No, it's incredibly fast. And it has a caching mechanism so that when you put a disc in, it's scanned, and the results are cache so the next time you put the disc in it doesn't have to rescan it. Once the disc is scanned(and I've not seen any take more than 10 seconds personally, but, there probably are some out there that take longer), ripping is no faster or slower than it was before.


Wow... I didn't realise it was just quite as fast as that! :eek:

There must be something very clever going on there given the time it takes other software to do this.

Doesn't seem possible but obviously it must be. :confused:

Did that 10 second maximum include difficult titles such as Blade HoC?


Wombler

[SamuriHL]

Wow... I didn't realise it was just quite as fast as that! :eek:

There must be something very clever going on there given the time it takes other software to do this.

Doesn't seem possible but obviously it must be. :confused:

Did that 10 second maximum include difficult titles such as Blade HoC?


Wombler

Yup, I scanned Blade HoC with it, no problems at all. There are titles that are going to DEFINITELY take longer, as I said. But, the discs I've thrown at it have all been pretty darn quick and I don't have an uber fast machine. There are several levels of AI Scanner, the default being "very fast". This should handle every disc out there.

[linx05]

I didn't know AnyDVD had a caching mechanism. That's pretty handy. I've set mine to Deep Scan. It only takes a few seconds.

[SamuriHL]

I didn't know AnyDVD had a caching mechanism. That's pretty handy. I've set mine to Deep Scan. It only takes a few seconds.

The cache creates very small files...say about 3-4k per disc. This allows AnyDVD to skip rescanning those tougher titles when you've already done so. Seems to work pretty well from what I can tell. As for Deep Scan, that shouldn't be necessary. When I asked Slysoft about it, they said that if Very Fast doesn't do it, it's probably a bug. :) Nonetheless, I'm glad those options are there. Who knows what protections we might run into that could require it.

[Wombler]

The cache creates very small files...say about 3-4k per disc. This allows AnyDVD to skip rescanning those tougher titles when you've already done so. Seems to work pretty well from what I can tell. As for Deep Scan, that shouldn't be necessary. When I asked Slysoft about it, they said that if Very Fast doesn't do it, it's probably a bug. :) Nonetheless, I'm glad those options are there. Who knows what protections we might run into that could require it.

That seems like a very positive sign to me.

It sounds to me as if they've already factored in the potential for as yet unrealised protections that could potentially circumvent the basic AI Scanner model.

It's been a long time since we've seen proactive rather than reactive updates and both SlySoft and Fengtao/Ting seem to have turned the tide.


Wombler

[SamuriHL]

Yea, we shall see. Let's wait and see what new protections they cook up. I don't expect we'll see anything made to defeat PathPlayer or AI Scanner for quite a few months as they'll have to analyze it and then come up with a way to defeat it. That's not instantaneous. So, for a while, at least, we can relax I think. :)

[blutach]

How does creating a cache of a specific disk that has already been ripped make it proactive for other DVDs? Confused.

Now, if it created an external database of these cache files and called home when a DVD was inserted, tnat would be another matter.

Regards

[DrinkLyeAndDie]

How does creating a cache of a specific disk that has already been ripped make it proactive for other DVDs? Confused.

I think you need to separate the two points. The method which is being employed to handle the protections is pro-active. The caching, IMHO, is only useful for when you may pop the disc in sometime down the road to view said disc again. Since it's already been scanned before why run a full scan on the disc yet again? In the case of a HTPC this could be considered a very useful feature for on-the-fly viewing from the original disc. Remember there is more to AnyDVD than just ripping your legally purchased and owned discs. :)

[Wombler]

How does creating a cache of a specific disk that has already been ripped make it proactive for other DVDs? Confused.

Now, if it created an external database of these cache files and called home when a DVD was inserted, tnat would be another matter.

Regards

Sorry for the confusion.

It was me that used the term proactive which was prompted by SlySoft's inclusion of the as yet unnecessary (according to SlySoft) deep scan options.

I was referring though to the approach adopted by both companies in developing similar systems which are intended to defeat future unknown protections.

I'm normally fairly lucid with my posts but perhaps I could have been a bit clearer.:)


Wombler

[blutach]

Thanks guys for the clarifications.

Regards

[SamuriHL]

If anyone's interested, the final version of AnyDVD is out. 6.1.8.4. It contains a nifty new info collection function where it zips up the IFOs, AnyDVD status window, and an extensive AnyDVD log file that includes filter driver information plus information about the titlesets on the disc. The zip file can be emailed to Slysoft support when problems are encountered. Gotta love that!

[Wombler]

If anyone's interested, the final version of AnyDVD is out. 6.1.8.4. It contains a nifty new info collection function where it zips up the IFOs, AnyDVD status window, and an extensive AnyDVD log file that includes filter driver information plus information about the titlesets on the disc. The zip file can be emailed to Slysoft support when problems are encountered. Gotta love that!

DVDFab has had this IFO zip feature as well for a few weeks now. It was included in response to certain recent discs with apparent multigigabyte IFOs that were too large to email.

I don't know if the SlySoft version is more comprehensive though.


Wombler

[SamuriHL]

DVDFab has had this IFO zip feature as well for a few weeks now. It was included in response to certain recent discs with apparent multigigabyte IFOs that were too large to email.

I don't know if the SlySoft version is more comprehensive though.


Wombler

From what I can see it does more than simply zip the IFOs. It gives the status window text, the AnyDVD log that now contains filter drivers that are installed plus information about the disc, and a few other diagnostic things that could potentially help them troubleshoot. It's a welcome addition I think. According to the Slysoft forum, it does look as though a regression bug has been found with Win2k. Currently Win2k owners will get a bunch of error messages when starting AnyDVD. They are looking into it.

[jinjin_jp]

Hi, I have interest and tried to use DVDFabHDDDecrypter(3.2.1.0) and AnyDVD(6.1.8.4).
Both seems to be changed excluding new scanner function.
Protected cells remain in VTS overview with replaced, The last version which I tested i.e; DVDFabHDDDecrypter(3.1.2.0b) and AnyDVD(6.1.4.3) removed protected cells in VTS overview.
Does it have any purpose?

About "Path player" I felt strange.
It is not for BadSector but for UnplayanleCells?
Even if set Disable, it shows "potential bad sector protections are removed!".
When Enable, it addly shows "Unplayable cell is removed!".
Even if it Disable, several DVDs of ARccOS or RipGuard can be ripped without problem, and BadSectors's cell are replaced.
But "Attack Force" can't if Disable, and it can if Enable. I felt EnableWhenNeed is little inconvinient, it must restart from first so have loss of time.
Ver.3.1.2.0b which doesn't have "Path player" could rip this DVD without problem.
The reason of this failure to remove Bad Sectors when Disable is mis-recognize?
It shows that potential bad sector protections are 5. But AnyDVD shows 6, and RipIt4Me 7.
Oppositely "Path player" mis-recognize playable cells as unplauable in "8 BELOW". Ripped file doesn't involve extras (unopened scene).

More differences (perhaps small) are between DVDFab and AnyDVD and RipIt4Me. But not examined yet.

Regards.

[Wombler]

About "Path player" I felt strange.
It is not for BadSector but for UnplayanleCells?
Even if set Disable, it shows "potential bad sector protections are removed!".

The program is designed to remove protections. The way it does it can be altered but it will always remove the protection no matter which choice you select.

When Enable, it addly shows "Unplayable cell is removed!".
Even if it Disable, several DVDs of ARccOS or RipGuard can be ripped without problem, and BadSectors's cell are replaced.
But "Attack Force" can't if Disable, and it can if Enable. I felt EnableWhenNeed is little inconvinient, it must restart from first so have loss of time.

Unfortunately you lose some time at the moment and that is a disadvantage. I believe Fengtao/Ting will develop PathPlayer to the stage where it's fast enough and reliable enough that it will always be used.

AnyDVD is very fast already so we know this is possible.

Ver.3.1.2.0b which doesn't have "Path player" could rip this DVD without problem.
The reason of this failure to remove Bad Sectors when Disable is mis-recognize?

That is probably an unexpected result of the way the program has been altered.

It shows that potential bad sector protections are 5. But AnyDVD shows 6, and RipIt4Me 7.
Oppositely "Path player" mis-recognize playable cells as unplauable in "8 BELOW". Ripped file doesn't involve extras (unopened scene).

Just because it identifies cells that may be protected doesn't mean that they actually are. Different methods of detection give different results but as long as the software eventually confirms those that are really protected then it doesn't matter how many potentially protected cells are identified at the start.


More differences (perhaps small) are between DVDFab and AnyDVD and RipIt4Me. But not examined yet.

They are both great programs but with slightly different features.

Depending on your needs you may find one program suits you better than the other.


Wombler