"Cinavia"/Verance BluRay audio watermark protection [Archive]

View Full Version : "Cinavia"/Verance BluRay audio watermark protection

Pages : [1] 2 3

setarip_old

21st July 2010, 02:44

(Although my findings neither prove nor disprove its existence) Playback of my MakeMKV full disc backup and movie-only backup (of the legitimate commercial BluRay "Losers" ) on both my SONY BDP S360 and PowerDVD v.7.3 on my PC proved to be totally normal - No splash screens advising of "Cinavia" protection, no disruption or termination of audio, no prevention of playback. ("Losers" supposedly contains this protection)

Then again, even if this "new" (It was first licensed to Universal Studios in 2003, for use with DVDs and VHS tapes - but likely never used) audio watermarking protection actually does exist on the original BluRay disc and was included in my backup copies, it shouldn't exhibit itself with my equipment because:

According to press releases, only PS3s and "unnamed" standalone players manufactured during the third quarter of 2009 and more recently will be equipped with the required Cinavia "component" (whether hardware or firmware has not been disclosed) - and neither my standalone nor PowerDVD have ever been updated, so they pre-date this protection.

It will be interesting to see what others may discover when they test their backups of the legitimate commercial BluRay on more current equipment.

Based on the pre-release postings at other websites regarding sources that were obviously other-than the legitimate commercial BluRay discs, my (wishful) speculation is that at this time, we may discover that thusfar this protection has only been implemented regarding movie theater digital films, as a means of deterring true piracy via "cams" - and that's fine with me...

kieranrk

21st July 2010, 11:44

Based on the pre-release postings at other websites regarding sources that were obviously other-than the legitimate commercial BluRay discs,]

As I said in the other thread, just because someone has received the disc early doesn't mean it is an illegitimate disc.

b66pak

21st July 2010, 17:59

in order to avoid wasting time and money on watermarked RETAIL BDs my i suggest to make a list with complete name (including "Limited", "Uncut", "Director's Cut", "Unrated", etc), region and anything else that will make easy to identify this new plague...
_

SamuriHL

21st July 2010, 18:18

I've been testing my legit US retail version of The Losers all day. I have some findings that will be of interest I think. I am testing on my PS3 with the latest firmware.

-ClownBD made movie only ISO burned to a BD RE SL Verbatim disc with just the DTS-HD MA audio track, the VC1 video track, and subtitles. Cinavia is detected at 20:03 into the movie.
-Same disc, but set the PS3 to bitstream core DTS from the DTS-HD MA track instead of decoding to LPCM (my PS3 doesn't bitstream HD audio), Cinavia is detected again
-Copy DVD version of The Losers with CloneDVD, movie only with no menus, onto a blank DVD+R. No Cinavia detected after 25 minutes of playback

Tests to come...I'm going to rip the AC3 track from the DVD and mux it in with the VC1 video of the BD and burn it to my BD RE and see if it's detected in that. I want to make a MakeMKV MKV of it and stream it to my PS3 to see if that gets detected. I want to make an xvid and stream that to my PS3 to see if that gets detected.

What a "fun" protection they seem to have given us to play with. :D

b66pak

21st July 2010, 18:58

considering that watermaked audio IS NOT an encryption-decryption problem and is effective against rebuilding could a moderator move this thread to rebuilding forum?
_

nurbs

21st July 2010, 19:28

SamuriHL, could you also try to reencode the movie to an .mp4 (AVC/AAC) and see if the PS3 also checks if the watermark is there in that case if you have time for that?

SamuriHL

21st July 2010, 19:33

Sure. I'll add it to the list. It looks as though the tests I have planned for today are going to take a while so it may be a day or two before I get everything accomplished. The disc also has a digital copy from iTunes and I know how to strip that DRM so I can play that, as well, but, it's *INCREDIBLY* unlikely the digital copy has Cinavia in it. Especially considering the DVD doesn't appear to. I'm in the middle of reauthoring a BD with the DVD's AC3 audio track to see if that'll work, but, my burner and discs aren't fast. So that'll take a while. I'm also testing some of the software players right now but don't expect they know about Cinavia yet.

setarip_old

21st July 2010, 19:42

@SamuriHL

Hi! ClownBD made movie only ISO burned to a BD RE SL Verbatim disc with just the DTS-HD MA audio track, the VC1 video track, and subtitles. Cinavia is detected at 20:03 into the movie.In addition to your PS3, did you try playing this on a (any) standalone BluRay player(s)?

1) It would be a good idea for someone to try a BD-RB-compressed version on PS3s and standalones (As I stated, my equipment predates the protection). Although the audiostream(s) would be unaltered, it would be interesting to see whether the changed correlation to videoframes might impact the watermark detection.

2) As a point of information, I did not hear or see anything unusual at the 20:03 point when playing back the video on my equipment - so I'd guess that customer complaints about the protection "interfering" with or diminishing playback quality for ALL players would fall on deaf ears.

3) Did anyone else notice a strange visual glitch at somewhere around the 9:30 mark of the movie. As the helicopter rises, a 2 dimensional green graphic appears briefly and seems to be "pulled up" to the helicopter. I woder if this could possibly have something to do with the protection...

laserfan

21st July 2010, 19:45

Sure. I'll add it to the list.An obvious thing to try is to either -core the DTS-MA track or otherwise convert it to AC3 (using eac3to) and see if the remuxed BD is still Cinavia-ed.

Clearly not every BD disc is going to include another soundtrack somewhere to use...

b66pak

21st July 2010, 19:48

SamuriHL

21st July 2010, 19:49

I only have a PS3 and my two HTPC's. My HTPC's have the latest versions of PDVD10, TMT3, and WinDVD2010. I'm attempting to play on TMT3 right now but it doesn't seem to detect it.

As for BD-RB, I'm not sure if it'll work on my machine as I have specific ffdshow versions I use that may or may not work with BD-RB.

The 20 minute mark isn't a specific point. The technology seems to require a 20 minute segment to be played for detection of this. It's not an exact point on the disc where the protection exists. The Cinavia signal (for lack of better terminology) is embedded in the audio signal and survives all re-encoding and even analog recording attempts. To test that last one, someone setup a camcorder pointed at their wall with The Losers running in the background. The playback of the recorded video (with the Losers audio in the background) triggered the Cinavia message 3 error on his PS3. As for the argument about whether this stuff is audible or not, I'm not going to entertain that discussion as it's very subjective. Some people may, most won't. It's similar to the 48/16 downsampling discussion.

I did not notice a glitch, no.

SamuriHL

21st July 2010, 19:49

An obvious thing to try is to either -core the DTS-MA track or otherwise convert it to AC3 (using eac3to) and see if the remuxed BD is still Cinavia-ed.

Clearly not every BD disc is going to include another soundtrack somewhere to use...

It survives re-encoding. So that will not help.

SamuriHL

21st July 2010, 19:53

i think the studios are focusing to BDs (need constant firmware updates so the penetration will be very good) and CAMs and not SDs (no firmware updates so no penetration!)...when they realize that you can rebuild BDs with SDs audio they will start to audio watermark the SDs too...
_

Certainly possible. In any case, this idiotic protection is not going to impact me in the least. For the PS3 I'll use my original. For backups I use MakeMKV to create MKV's that I then play using WMP/7MC with ffdshow anyway, so, this protection is pointless.

A little background for those that don't fully get how it works. They embed an (inaudible lol) signal into the audio stream. The signal will survive all re-encoding attempts and even analog recording, and yes, this has been tested by others. So no matter what format you think you can convert it to, the Cinavia signal will still be present and detectable on Cinavia enabled equipment.

However, and here's the kicker, it *REQUIRES* a Cinavia enabled player to detect the signal and then follow the "rules" for playback. (Message 1 is typically a CAM recording, Message 3 is typically a copied Blu-ray recording). If the player doesn't know how to detect it, or simply doesn't care, then this protection is useless. Just something to consider. ;)

setarip_old

21st July 2010, 20:01

If anyone with more technical knowledge than I have is interested, here's a link I came upon, to a "challenge" regarding audio watermarking, dating back to 2001:

http://www.usenix.org/publications/library/proceedings/sec01/craver.pdf

laserfan

21st July 2010, 20:04

It survives re-encoding. So that will not help.Thanks, I guess you knew that already! ;)

It will be interesting to see whether any studio is brazen enough to produce a BD movie (Star Wars? Titanic? Avatar 3D?) which REQUIRES a player firmware update and which then INCLUDES a stealth update to force Cinavia.

We'll update with caution! :)

SamuriHL

21st July 2010, 20:10

Thanks, I guess you knew that already! ;)

It will be interesting to see whether any studio is brazen enough to produce a BD movie (Star Wars? Titanic? Avatar 3D?) which REQUIRES a player firmware update and which then INCLUDES a stealth update to force Cinavia.

We'll update with caution! :)

My fear is far worse than that. I'm not sure how much trouble they'd get in for implementing my thought, though. *IF*, and I really don't know if this is possible but, IF players made before Q4 2009 (all players since have Cinavia built in....surprise! :D) can be updated by firmware to detect Cinavia, then there is a really ugly possibility. The AACS LA could revoke the player keys of all players that don't support Cinavia but could support it with a firmware update. This would force everyone with such a player to update in order to play original discs. Please understand that this is fear mongering speculation on my part. Simply a brainstorming "what if/what is possible" scenario. I don't even know if a firmware update would make older players detect this nonsense. But if so, then my scenario isn't impossible to imagine. All it would take is popping in a new disc that has your player key revoked and a "hey, you need a new firmware to play um ANY disc" message and poof...game over for that player and backups that contain Cinavia. And since all the studios have signed on to use this, it's only a matter of time before this gets nasty.

Oh, and you media streamer people...don't get so complacent. I've seen evidence that the WD Live players support Cinavia. So, streaming a backup of one of these discs will trigger it on those devices, too. :devil: What a pain.

b66pak

21st July 2010, 20:13

the low end NMTs selling will be boosted to the roof!
_

SamuriHL

21st July 2010, 20:15

HEHE, see my last comment. As long as they don't get updated to support this stuff. I'm not even sure if older equipment CAN get updated but I'm just speculating. Man would that suck. I'll stick with ffdshow. I'm fairly sure Albain has no interest in adding Cinavia support. :D

laserfan

21st July 2010, 20:27

The AACS LA could revoke the player keys of all players that don't support Cinavia but could support it with a firmware update. This would force everyone with such a player to update in order to play original discs.I guess the $64 question is whether a "simple" firmware update is all that's required, or if there's more to it in order for a player to detect Cinavia. Guess we'll find out sooner rather than later though!

laserfan

21st July 2010, 20:33

Another thought I just had: if this stuff makes backups impossible, I for one might not buy another BD, but rather rent it instead! If I can't manipulate it to the backup I prefer (no intros/movie only, smaller &/or repositioned subtitles mainly) then why buy it if a rental option exists.

I wouldn't be alone in this; so the "purchase" market shrinks, and might they try to put "rental" shops out-of-business also--hell I doubt it, there are too many Mom & Pop businesses, much less large rental businesses, which would be affected. Hollywood wouldn't shoot itself in that way, would it? :D

SamuriHL

21st July 2010, 20:38

I don't know the answer on the firmware update thing. James at SlySoft doesn't think it's possible to update older players with just a firmware update. I honestly don't know.

They're trying to "kill" the rental market now as it is by doing the 30 day delay nonsense. They're under the delusion that people will buy more BD's if they have to wait an extra 30 days to rent them. LOL! So yes, Hollywood WOULD shoot itself. No question.

setarip_old

21st July 2010, 20:57

As long as speculation appears to be the order of the day:

If (and I don't know why this would be the case) DVDs are not subjected to this protection, with more and more people realizing that most BluRay disc "Extras" are of little or no more interest/value than those of DVDs - and that the upconverting playback quality of most newer BluRay players ranges from "quite acceptable" to "excellent" - it's conceivable that the viewing public might redirect more of its entertainment dollars to good ol' DVDs (Yes, I consider the "new" BluRay 3D to be nothing more than a marketing ploy)...

SamuriHL

21st July 2010, 21:01

That's possible, too. Really depends on how many people backup their library, and how many of those will be affected by this. (I.E. using hardware players that contain Cinavia) Since the PS3 is one of the most popular BD players out there, I can see this becoming an issue for many people. It's the media streaming people that I'm most concerned about, though. Most of those devices don't have the option of playing the original like the BD player people do. So, for their device to be useful at all, it can't support Cinavia. That's a real slap in the face to that group. Anyway, we'll see if DVD's start getting this, too, as it's technically possible.

Inspector.Gadget

21st July 2010, 21:10

Technically possible on modern devices, sure, but think about how many DVD players can't receive firmware updates - and think about how many non-bleeding edge users that would alienate. IMO that's even more of a shot in the studios' own feet than putting it in BDs.

SamuriHL

21st July 2010, 21:15

I agree. This whole protection is idiotic for many reasons. But, I know that it's a requirement for any AACS LA licensed players to support it. You can bet that means the big 3 software players will get it soon, too. As for DVD, the only reason I could see to add it there is to close off a potential loophole for BD. If what I'm currently working on works, for example, then not putting it on the DVD allows people to remux the AC3 or DTS audio stream from the DVD into a backup of the BD. That'll bypass it completely. So, any time they release an open audio stream, it defeats the purpose of even bothering for the BD. Yea, I know, it's not HD audio. But, will that matter to the pirates they're trying to stop? Seems unlikely given the format of choice they're using these days. It's going to annoy those of us who buy a large library of discs and want to protect that investment by making backups. Not to mention I like having my whole library in an easy to use format (MKV) on my HTPC so I can stream it anywhere in my house without having to go grab the original off the shelf. Very convenient. If they stop people from being able to do those things, they very well may kill BD completely.

setarip_old

21st July 2010, 21:22

Maybe now people will stop questioning my BluRay to HD-DVD converting...

SamuriHL

21st July 2010, 21:28

Maybe now people will stop questioning my BluRay to HD-DVD converting...

LOL. I suppose that's one way to go. It's a pretty sure bet that there aren't any HD DVD players that support Cinavia out there. :D Personally I'd rather just convert everything (including my HD DVD's) to MKV and be done with it. Given the rock solid performance I get with ffdshow in all DShow apps (and WMP/7MC with Win7DSTweaker), I'm set using that method. It's the hardware people I worry about. If they can hold on to their players that don't support it without being forced to update, that's great. The PS3 users are not so lucky as they're forced to update to be able to play games online. :( But, hey, if you're happy with your workaround, it's all good. :)

Revgen

21st July 2010, 21:59

If all they are doing is producing a non-audible signal, then can't this signal just be altered by adding noise?

SamuriHL

21st July 2010, 22:33

setarip_old

21st July 2010, 22:59

This is perhaps a bit farfetched, but at this stage anythig goes:

Thusfar, all the testing has been predicated on what has been made public. Has anyone tried extracting the VIDEOstream and playing it by itself - to see if the "CINAVIA" protection is triggered?

SamuriHL

21st July 2010, 23:11

I'm doing a test that should more or less match that. I have it burning now. I took the AC3 track from the DVD and muxed it in with the video stream from the BD. :D I'm burning that to a BD-RE now and will test it. We'll see what happens.

SamuriHL

22nd July 2010, 00:45

Good bye, Cinavia. My BD-RE with the DVD's audio track muxed in works fine. No Cinavia. Understand that the *ONLY* difference from my disc that has Cinavia and the one that doesn't is a switch of the audio track. Chapters, subtitles, and the video track are all identical on both discs. So, there, you have a work around for any BD that comes with a DVD, as well. :)

setarip_old

22nd July 2010, 01:30

So, there, you have a work around for any BD that comes with a DVD, as well.Nice to know that's the case for the moment, at least.

It won't take much effort to make minor adjustments to vary total length of DVD versus BluRay, beginning "black space", opening studio credits, etc...

SamuriHL

22nd July 2010, 01:37

I don't consider it a permanent solution. The studios will likely just add it to the DVD next time. (This, btw, would be WHY they'd add it to the DVD. Not because DVD players can detect it, but, because ANY audio source not protected could be used to replace the audio on a protected backup) In any case, ALL of my testing has simply been academic. I have a solution. I just wanted to provide some real world data for people to mull over. I hope it's been useful and I'll continue to do more tests as time goes on.

Keiyakusha

22nd July 2010, 01:38

Someone will have to study the differences (Is there some DVDs with PCM audio?) and then simulate Cinavia :Р

EDIT: What I mean is if you will be able to produce cinavia - you will be sure that you found what you looking for and not some random noise from the street. Then you can think of some counter-measure.

setarip_old

22nd July 2010, 01:39

As I said in the initial post, it will be interesting to see what others may discover when they test their backups of the legitimate commercial BluRay on more current equipment.

I'm surprised there haven't been more participants to this thread, as the more information we all see and share, the better to hopefully separate truth from fiction...

SamuriHL

22nd July 2010, 01:45

Well, with only ONE disc out in the wild right now with this protection on it, and not a particular GREAT movie at that, it's not all that surprising. We'll have to see how many titles get this foolish protection going forward. AFAIK, all the studios have signed on board and the AACS LA has required all new players sold since Q4 2009 to have this protection detection in place. So yea, I suspect as we go along, this will become more and more of a problem for people.

HWK

22nd July 2010, 08:07

Hmm, Let's hope they don't add similar copy protection to video stream.

Peer van Heuen

22nd July 2010, 11:13

2) As a point of information, I did not hear or see anything unusual at the 20:03 point when playing back the video on my equipment

The technology seems to require a 20 minute segment to be played for detection of this.

Just to avoid misconceptions: it has been speculated numerous times, that the actual detection of the watermark would take 20 minutes (because it's so hard to detect).
That is very, very unlikely. Consider, that you can (and it is officially condoned) simply pause playback for at least 10 minutes and you will get another 20 minutes of unmuted playback.
I suppose this type of reaction to the wm is embedded in the watermark itself - as other types of cinavia watermarks found on bootlegs seem to trigger it right away (haven't tried that myself, but it has been stated somewhere).

It's possibly just make it more difficult to defeat it - if every attempt to do so will require at least 20 minutes of testing afterwards.
Defeating it on cam recordings is a little more difficult anyway, as there is no real "unmarked" audio stream to compare with (the cam recording adds so much noise itself that you won't be able to tell the difference between a mark and trash frequencies), while with blu-rays there obviously is.

I'm pretty sure you'll be able to reliably detect the watermark in any chunk of a few seconds length taken out of the audio stream.

we may discover that thusfar this protection has only been implemented regarding movie theater digital films, as a means of deterring true piracy via "cams" - and that's fine with me... [/Color]

Totally agreed. They could have gone on doing that for ages to come. But now, after introducing it to blu-rays, they've drawn so much attention to this protection, that it will probably not survive a year....

it will be interesting to see what others may discover when they test their backups of the legitimate commercial BluRay on more current equipment.

So far I have only seen mentionings of the Pioneer BDP-V6000 having the detection on board. No actual confirmations so far.

deets

22nd July 2010, 11:50

am i being overly paranoid, could they put this in the PSP as well?

SamuriHL

22nd July 2010, 13:29

Just to avoid misconceptions: it has been speculated numerous times, that the actual detection of the watermark would take 20 minutes (because it's so hard to detect).
That is very, very unlikely. Consider, that you can (and it is officially condoned) simply pause playback for at least 10 minutes and you will get another 20 minutes of unmuted playback.
I suppose this type of reaction to the wm is embedded in the watermark itself - as other types of cinavia watermarks found on bootlegs seem to trigger it right away (haven't tried that myself, but it has been stated somewhere).

It's possibly just make it more difficult to defeat it - if every attempt to do so will require at least 20 minutes of testing afterwards.
Defeating it on cam recordings is a little more difficult anyway, as there is no real "unmarked" audio stream to compare with (the cam recording adds so much noise itself that you won't be able to tell the difference between a mark and trash frequencies), while with blu-rays there obviously is.

I'm pretty sure you'll be able to reliably detect the watermark in any chunk of a few seconds length taken out of the audio stream.

Totally agreed. They could have gone on doing that for ages to come. But now, after introducing it to blu-rays, they've drawn so much attention to this protection, that it will probably not survive a year....

So far I have only seen mentionings of the Pioneer BDP-V6000 having the detection on board. No actual confirmations so far.

Thanks, Peer. Good information as always. :) It's interesting to note that the PS3 at least seems to detect it faster and faster each time. For instance, on the original BD-RE I made yesterday, it took 20 minutes, 3 seconds to show the error and mute the audio. On subsequent backup attempts, and even my attempt at bitstreaming the DTS core, it took a little over 19 minutes to show the error and mute the audio. It's been suggested that the PS3 has some kind of cache but I don't really know.

SamuriHL

22nd July 2010, 13:31

Whoever it was that asked me to make an MP4, I did so last night and streamed it a few minutes ago. AAC stereo audio converted from the DTS-HD MA track. (And in fact, I had run it through MakeMKV first to convert it to a MKV before the MP4 conversion). Detected Cinavia in a little over 19 minutes as I said in my last post. Audio re-encoding will not help, as we already knew. At least I was able to confirm it. I have one more thing I want to try and then I'll be done playing with this foolish protection for now. It's been a fun little experiment, though.

nurbs

22nd July 2010, 13:37

Thanks. I thought maybe it won't check in all media, but then again that would make the watermark kind of pointless.

kypec

22nd July 2010, 13:50

AAC stereo audio converted from the DTS-HD MA track
Does that mean that watermark signal remains there even when original multi-channel audio has been normalized and/or downmixed to stereo? Very effective technique I would say...
:thanks: for your experiments

SamuriHL

22nd July 2010, 13:58

laserfan

22nd July 2010, 14:37

From a technical standpoint I'm actually kind of impressed.You've described this protection countless times as "stupid", and (most often) "foolish". When are you going to change to "clever", "brilliant", "impenetrable", "unstoppable"...? ;)

SamuriHL

22nd July 2010, 14:42

You've described this protection countless times as "stupid", and (most often) "foolish". When are you going to change to "clever", "brilliant", "impenetrable", "unstoppable"...? ;)

ROFLMAO! When I refer to it as stupid and foolish it's as an end user that wants to backup their library. :) Again, from a purely technical standpoint, it is pretty impressive. The signal is embedded in such a way that it resists all re-encoding and even analog recording. And in theory, at least, this signal is inaudible. (The jury's out on that one and I'm not even going to TRY to debate it. The purists would crucify me if I even tried.) That's not a small accomplishment, really. However, as an end user, it's stupid and foolish. :D

laserfan

22nd July 2010, 14:50

ROFLMAO!Glad you took my comment as the joke that it was (I was smiling as I typed it).

I wonder about one thing that I don't think has been discussed--how does a company like Oppo get away with not including such stuff (Cinavia or I think even AACS) in their players? I thought they signed-on with the Sony Gestapo and had to follow all their rulez.

SamuriHL

22nd July 2010, 14:54

kypec

22nd July 2010, 14:59

Yup, that's exactly what it means. No matter how you re-encode it, the watermark is still embedded into the signal. From a technical standpoint I'm actually kind of impressed. From a wanting to backup my collection of movies standpoint, not so much. :D
What about applying some strong low-pass filter, let's say <15kHz?
I know such manipulation have no real use for typical end users (read audiophiles) but I'm just being curious for the sake of it.:rolleyes:

laserfan

22nd July 2010, 15:05

Oppo definitely supports AACS. Their BD player is pre-Cinavia vintage afaik, so, unless they can update it with a firmware to support Cinavia, there's nothing they can do. I suspect a LOT of existing players are going to be in the same boat. If it's possible to update with a firmware, then they'll be required to at some point. The AACS LA is requiring all new players to support it. That means TMT/PDVD/WinDVD will all have to support it at some point, too. Good times.Thanks. Hey as the current, undisputed, reigning expert on this subject you might wanna take some care to add the :rolleyes: smilie to some of your "Good times" comments. Methinks it confuses some people.

And, some of us are easily confused! :p

SamuriHL

22nd July 2010, 15:14

What about applying some strong low-pass filter, let's say <15kHz?
I know such manipulation have no real use for typical end users (read audiophiles) but I'm just being curious for the sake of it.:rolleyes:

I honestly couldn't tell you. Definitely not an area I know anything about. I suspect, however, that the signal is embedded over various frequencies, but I'm just guessing here.

SamuriHL

22nd July 2010, 15:19

Thanks. Hey as the current, undisputed, reigning expert on this subject you might wanna take some care to add the :rolleyes: smilie to some of your "Good times" comments. Methinks it confuses some people.

And, some of us are easily confused! :p

Reigning expert? ROFLMAO! I'm gonna go with no on that one. :D All I've done is to take my retail disc and run it through various backup scenarios and post the results. I have NO idea how to defeat this protection. I don't even fully understand how it works. They embed a signal in the audio stream (all channels, btw) that can resist re-encoding and analog recording attempts. The player somehow detects the embedded signal. And somehow (wizards?!) they managed to make it "inaudible". I put that in quotes for the purists that would say it's not really inaudible. How that signal works I have no idea. Wish I did. :) What's neat is they apparently have a couple different kinds of signals. For example, if you go to a cinema and record a movie (HIGHLY illegal, NOT RECOMMENDED) and bring it home to watch on your Cinavia enabled device, it apparently detects it immediately and shuts down playback completely. At least according to what I've read when searching for info on this. Then there's the signal embedded on my retail BD. This triggers after about 20 minutes or so of playing and mutes the audio. It's quite fascinating if not annoying. :)

CruNcher

23rd July 2010, 07:47

Yeah as they state the Content owner can decide what the user is able todo with it DRM, though it's not really impressive if you know that research in this field was going on for many years and if you know about the things that for example IBM was researching it isn't really surprising either, Cinavia could very well replace also (IBMs DRM) stuff like the in house streaming only or licensed devices allowed only part as it seems to be configurable that way also only every Device and Software on the market would need to be prepared for this which will take some time, i guess we gonna see more in the future also here on Doom9 reporting about issues, the 20 min playback seems to be wanted btw from Universal as a Trial watch period very clever ;)

TwoToad

23rd July 2010, 16:22

I'm not sure if this is possible, would there be a way to load both the DVD audio and the BluRay audio in some audio program and compare the two? I'm not sure of the terminology, but do some sort of search that would find the differences or subtract the differences...

If the signal could be identified, maybe some sort of filter could be made to remove the signal.

I don't know if this is helpful in anyway, just sort of thinking out loud =)

SamuriHL

23rd July 2010, 16:29

That idea has been discussed on another forum. As one person pointed out, "eyeballing" it is not going to be very productive. If you don't know what you're searching for, finding it will be impossible even if you believe you have "identical" streams, which of course they're not. One is a DTS-HD MA track, and even if you convert it to AC3 it'll still be different than the DVD's AC3 track. Even if they were theoretically identical, finding the signal embedded isn't going to be easy. Certainly not really possible just looking at them visually.

TwoToad

23rd July 2010, 16:37

Yeah, but if you subtracted the differences between the two sources, you should be left with a third "inaudible" wave file. My guess is that it would look like pulses in a repeating pattern, like Morse code.

PacoBell

23rd July 2010, 17:44

Yeah, but if you subtracted the differences between the two sources, you should be left with a third "inaudible" wave file.That's probably a little naive. As SamuriHL mentioned earlier, the BD and DVD audio streams are so fundamentally different that even if you could "subtract the difference" between the two, you'd be throwing out a whole bunch of good information along with the Cinavia signal, maybe even to the point of degrading the quality to unintelligibility.

setarip_old

24th July 2010, 05:38

**EDIT - Truncated URLs Fixed

As I mentioned in another thread, the following appears to indicate that Foobar/Foobar2000 has the capability of identifying and eliminating audio watermarking (Post #3):

http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?p=1302992#post1302992

Although this is applicable to audio DVDs (DVD-A), if it works, it might provide some insight regarding the workings of the "Verance"/"Cinavia" watermarking methodology, as well as possibly eliminate the need to perform some testing that has already been done.This, in addition to the 2001 white paper at:

http://www.usenix.org/publications/library/proceedings/sec01/craver.pdf

might provide a significant "leg up" in analysis...

kypec

24th July 2010, 10:29

setarip_old: please fix the links in your previous post, they are truncated :(

Wilbert

24th July 2010, 13:28

setarip_old: please fix the links in your previous post, they are truncated
http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?p=1302992#post1302992

setarip_old

24th July 2010, 19:35

@kypec, @Wilbert

The links have been repaired in my post - and here they are again:

http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?p=1302992#post1302992

http://www.usenix.org/publications/library/proceedings/sec01/craver.pdf

Sherbona

24th July 2010, 21:06

As I mentioned in another thread, the following appears to indicate that Foobar/Foobar2000 has the capability of identifying and eliminating audio watermarking (Post #3)
Actually that post means that plugin gives Foobar the capability of defeating DVD-Audio's CPPM protection (thus allowing ripping to flac, wav etc... on a hard drive), and the ability to detect whether the source DVD-Audio disc has watermarking or not. However that plugin does not give Foobar the ability to eliminate the audio watermarking itself from the copied/ripped audio.

This means after ripping a commercial watermarked DVD-Audio disc and then using the resulting files to author another DVD-Audio disc, the resulting disc will not playback correctly if played in a DVD-Audio player that observes watermarking protection - but not all players check for watermarking, for instance Oppo players do not check for it.

So the Foobar plugin's ability to detect watermarking is useful for those who have players that observe watermarking, it allows those folks to know ahead of time whether they can make a playable copied DVD-Audio disc or not from their source disc. Removing watermarking itself from copied/ripped DVD-Audio is not done in any of the DVD-Audio ripping tools like Foobar with that plugin or with DVD Audio Explorer.

setarip_old

24th July 2010, 21:26

The following link appears to indicate that the concern about a "Cinavia" component already being included in WDTVLive hardware may very well be a red herring (Audio problems actually due to a new default setting in the current version of MKVToolnix (compression of audio headings) Read the entire thread:

http://forum.wdlxtv.com/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1036&start=0

Thanks to "~bt~" for finding and posting about this link in another thread...

asarian

24th July 2010, 22:37

Not without destroying the audio. It's not just embedded in the "non-audible" range from what I understand. They engineered it to not be audible, but, it's deeply embedded in the original audio track before mastering. I don't quite understand how the whole thing works, but, I understand enough of it to know that without being able to first detect it inside the audio track, there's absolutely no way to think about removing it.

And yet detection is 'trivial'. Which is to say, the manner in which to detect it is clear and present in every device that uses Cinavia. That's its Achilles heel.

Basically, all you need to do is to watch what the detector-side takes for markers. Of course, these are not markers in the sense of A-B-C-marker-D-E; but even when superimposed (or 'underimposed' is probably better, albeit awkward) onto the audio stream, it's still a marker, in the sense that the detector can extract pertinent information from it. In that regard, it doesn't really have to be removed altogether; you can criple/distort/weaken the markers, up to a point where the detector can't pick up on them any more. Or you could alter it just in relevant spots, so as to create the equivalent of a 'region-free' disc, so to speak.

So, all-in-all, I'm not that worried.

N.B. Also, it's a good thing I didn't hook up my PS3 to the Internet. I can stream H264 + 5.1 HD audio (in the form of LPCM); So I'm safe until my PS3 breaks. And, btw, I think it's pretty sleasy to sneak this malware onto people's systems, without an honest announcement.

Also, in my country, I am entitled, under law, to make a home copy of my Blu-Rays. In fact, I stream all Blu-Rays I own, simply because I prefer the 'point-and-click' menu of a mediaplayer over the spammy 'I want to forcibly show you ten previews first' method of inserting the real disc. Welcome to Sony et al. infringing yet further on my rights!

SamuriHL

24th July 2010, 23:17

asarian

24th July 2010, 23:30

Doing so, mind you, will most likely introduce audible flaws in the audio stream. You can't just randomly alter audio data and hope that it breaks the Cinavia detector while remaining inaudible. The likelihood of that happening is not very good. And from what I understand, it's spread across the frequency spectrum so it's not going to be all that easy to get rid of it. As for detection, sure, you can watch a player as it's running the detection routine. How, exactly, do you propose to do that when the only players that currently support it are hardware based? (Well, the PS3 is arguably a software player in every sense of the word, but, um, afaik the best hackers in the world have given up trying to hack it). You'd need a software based player that detects it in order to fully analyze it. That doesn't exist yet.
Maybe I should have stuck a 'theoretically' in there somewhere; as, obviously, it's only 'trivial' if you have full access to the detection mechanism, which, as you point out, no one has yet. In fact, I highly doubt it can even be properly detected without following a machine actually doing the detecting; just looking at an audio stream, at least, I think will be a hopeless endeavor.

And yes, naturally, just arbitrarily munging audio data in the hope Cinavia won't be picked up on, would be a very bad idea. For one, you'd butcher the audio; and, for two, for this protection to be worth anything, it's probably extremely redundant, in that removing it in one spot wouldn't do you anything.

SamuriHL

24th July 2010, 23:37

Yup, that's pretty much how I look at it. The hardware analysis game is a difficult one at best. And without being able to detect it, removing it from the audio stream is going to be "difficult" at best. Especially if you don't want to kill the audio quality. It's been shown to be quite robust, too, so, it's going to be rather nasty trying to remove or break it without killing the audio.

A.Fenderson

25th July 2010, 03:01

asarian

25th July 2010, 03:31

Knowing nothing about how digital watermarking systems work, this may be a bit naive of me, and this likely only applies for making Blu-ray rips to be played back in blu-ray players on BD-Rs/REs anyway, but...
What if we approached it from the other angle: instead of masking/eliminating the marking, we signal the detector that the file being played back is indeed the original (legit) disc and not a copy?
Well, that's essentially the method used by AnyDVDHD's famous virtual machine, in short emulating a 'real' Blu-Ray player. However, how would you go about doing so on a PS3? The PS3 simply knows it's streaming or not; there's no signal that's gonna change that. :) And if it detects a Cinavia signature in the audio-stream, you're humped. In the case of AnyDVDHD, they basically built an emulated Blu-Ray player around a disc; whereas you want to emulate a disc inside an existing Blu-Ray player. The latter is simply physically impossible (unless someone hacked the PS3 software, of course; which hasn't been done yet; and not for lack of trying).

It doesn't look all that bleak, though, come to think of it. It's just a matter of waiting for the next release of PowerDVD; and then, soon thereafter, the algorithm will be pwned. Unless the industry simultaneously banned the use of Blu-Ray software playback with the advent of Cinavia; but that seems highly unlikely (and would probably open up the floodgates of lawsuits to them).

SamuriHL

25th July 2010, 03:43

Or, the industry smartens up and creates an exemption for software players and don't allow them to use Cinavia, thus preserving it on the realm of hardware players and uncracked. :)

asarian

25th July 2010, 03:48

Or, the industry smartens up and creates an exemption for software players and don't allow them to use Cinavia, thus preserving it on the realm of hardware players and uncracked. :)
Well, in that case it's time I finally bought that fancy Xonar sound card with the HDMI out, and we'll bypass the PS3 altogether. They can't have their cookie and eat it. :)

SamuriHL

25th July 2010, 04:07

Well, in that case it's time I finally bought that fancy Xonar sound card with the HDMI out, and we'll bypass the PS3 altogether. They can't have their cookie and eat it. :)

I'm covered in all cases, personally. I have a PS3, but, I rarely use it for watching videos these days. I rely on my HTPC's, of which I have 2. In the past month, I've converted from using ISO images of my movies to MKV's. I've been using MakeMKV to create them. Using ffdshow and 1 of 3 splitters that support PGS subs within an MKV, I'm able to watch my whole library from any machine on my gigabit network just by opening 7MC and going into my video library. :) ffdshow gives me full bitstreaming. And it will never care about Cinavia. The only time I'm going to care about Cinavia is on rented discs. Then I use TMT3 or PDVD10 for playback. If those start to support Cinavia, then I'll use MPC-HC more and more until SlyPlayer is released. (I ALWAYS have AnyDVD open when watching movies, so, that would trigger Cinavia on rented discs on a commercial player if it supported it. Disabling AnyDVD is not an acceptable alternative for me.) Nonetheless, I would like to see this thing defeated for all the hardware people out there who are affected by this. What annoys me the most is the parallel to the gaming world. Draconian DRM screws the guy who buys a ton of BD's and wants to backup his collection. It has _ZERO_ affect on the pirates. They will find a way around this and continue posting their illegal stuff online. I'm *TOTALLY* on board with using this for cinemas. So called "CAM releases" should be DRM'd and stopped. But home BD releases that someone buys and wants to backup? Not so much.

SamuriHL

25th July 2010, 04:08

P.S. Skip the Xonar and get an nVidia 460 or ATI 5xxx card instead. You'll thank me later. :)

asarian

25th July 2010, 05:52

P.S. Skip the Xonar and get an nVidia 460 or ATI 5xxx card instead. You'll thank me later. :)
Most interesting! :) Are you saying the nVidia 460, next to HDMI video, can output HD sound over the same HDMI cable as well? In that case, yeah, I might as well built an HTPC and just get the PS3 out of the loop altogether. Would save me a lot of time re-encoding VC1 too.

FAKE EDIT: Hmm, seems even my crappy GTX 285 can do HDMI video + HD audio (via small S/PDIF loopback cable).

Okay, I feel a lot better now. :) Even if my PS3 dies, seems I'm covered with an HTPC.

Thank you already!

sub24ox7

25th July 2010, 06:25

The nvidia 285 can not do HD audio and it is also impossible to pass HD audio through spdif, HD audio can only by bitstreamed through
HDMI 1.3 and decoded and passed through as PCM with any version of HDMI as far as I know. I still have a xonar and look forward to the day of being able to be rid of it! I am going to get a ATi 5*** series card soon for HTPC.

asarian

25th July 2010, 07:05

The nvidia 285 can not do HD audio and it is also impossible to pass HD audio through spdif,
LOL. That's what I get for posting at 7 AM! :) Yes, that was never going to work. So I'll just get a GTX 460 for it.

rotty

25th July 2010, 13:17

Doing so, mind you, will most likely introduce audible flaws in the audio stream. You can't just randomly alter audio data and hope that it breaks the Cinavia detector while remaining inaudible. The likelihood of that happening is not very good. And from what I understand, it's spread across the frequency spectrum so it's not going to be all that easy to get rid of it. As for detection, sure, you can watch a player as it's running the detection routine. How, exactly, do you propose to do that when the only players that currently support it are hardware based? (Well, the PS3 is arguably a software player in every sense of the word, but, um, afaik the best hackers in the world have given up trying to hack it). You'd need a software based player that detects it in order to fully analyze it. That doesn't exist yet.

Re detecting Cinavia, I read a post here that said someone had played a movie twice on his PS3 and the movie muted but at different points on the two plays. I suspect that when the player detects Cinavia, and decides the disk is not ROM, then a random number is used which is the delay time before mute.

This makes it impossible to watch a player to get a clue as to the postion(s) in the stream the Cinavia is being detected.

SamuriHL

25th July 2010, 14:21

Re detecting Cinavia, I read a post here that said someone had played a movie twice on his PS3 and the movie muted but at different points on the two plays. I suspect that when the player detects Cinavia, and decides the disk is not ROM, then a random number is used which is the delay time before mute.

This makes it impossible to watch a player to get a clue as to the postion(s) in the stream the Cinavia is being detected.

Yes, I've noticed the "randomness". Apparently it's a delay that the studios can set. Warner Bros decided on about 20 minutes. But we can't just assume there are "points" that it samples to detect Cinavia. It's most likely embedded throughout the entire audio track rather than at random points.

SamuriHL

25th July 2010, 14:23

A comment on the nVidia stuff....only the new 4xx cards support HD audio bitstreaming. Anything that uses an S/PDIF conncector automatically fails. :) The new cards do not. They can already bitstream in WinDVD due to it using the standard bitstream types and ffdshow for the same reason. PDVD10 and TMT3 will need updates in order to bitstream. Maybe one of those updates will bring Cinavia support. :D We'll see on that one.

rotty

25th July 2010, 14:43

Yes, I've noticed the "randomness". Apparently it's a delay that the studios can set. Warner Bros decided on about 20 minutes. But we can't just assume there are "points" that it samples to detect Cinavia. It's most likely embedded throughout the entire audio track rather than at random points.

Yes but what I meant was that when the player has received the data it needs from the audio, instead of acting on it immediately, there is a random time let pass before it mutes, this means that there is no clue whatsoever by watching the player where it was detected.

In other words, each time you play the same movie from the beginning, it will mute at a different place to last time you played it.

SamuriHL

25th July 2010, 14:47

Yes but what I meant was that when the player has received the data it needs from the audio, instead of acting on it immediately, there is a random time let pass before it mutes, this means that there is no clue whatsoever by watching the player where it was detected.

In other words, each time you play the same movie from the beginning, it will mute at a different place to last time you played it.

Yup, that's exactly right. It could be detecting it in less than a second for all we know.

In any case, SlySoft has said they plan on removing it. I have no idea what their plans are on that and what timeframe they're looking at. I doubt it'll be soon.

colinhunt

25th July 2010, 15:11

I doubt it'll be soon.
My thoughts exactly. It's very likely quite a lot more difficult to remove than BD+ was.

rotty

25th July 2010, 15:11

Yup, that's exactly right. It could be detecting it in less than a second for all we know.

In any case, SlySoft has said they plan on removing it. I have no idea what their plans are on that and what timeframe they're looking at. I doubt it'll be soon.

Just imagine if these studios were not paying out for AACS, BD+, Cinavia etc how much more profit they would be making.

The price of BD movies could come down drastically then and they would still be making fantastic profits with more buying into the format to boot.

As for piracy, who would bother if the price of Blu Ray came down.

As ive said before, its not us they have to worry about, in fact they are alienating the very people that buy into this medium, how foolish is that.

We are not the pirates.

SamuriHL

25th July 2010, 15:18

My thoughts exactly. It's very likely quite a lot more difficult to remove than BD+ was.

I don't think it's likely to be in AnyDVD, either, from what James has said. Maybe it'll be a feature in CloneBD. I really don't know. Just going by what was said in the SlySoft thread. I trust that the SlyGods will figure it out, though. They have a very good track record with this sort of thing. ;)

rotty

25th July 2010, 15:20

SamuriHL

25th July 2010, 15:21

Just imagine if these studios were not paying out for AACS, BD+, Cinavia etc how much more profit they would be making.

The price of BD movies could come down drastically then and they would still be making fantastic profits with more buying into the format to boot.

As for piracy, who would bother if the price of Blu Ray came down.

As ive said before, its not us they have to worry about, in fact they are alienating the very people that buy into this medium, how foolish is that.

We are not the pirates.

I agree. I've said the same thing many times. This protection is going to bother the people that want to make legit backups of the discs they purchase. But it's not going to bother the idiots who download everything from P2P sites.

REMOVAL

As I understand it, the Cinavia encoding is embed by audio timing/short term repetition (echoes) in the audio. So I would think it probably can be removed seamlessly

That would be nice. I guess we have to wait and see what the best hackers in the world come up with on this one. :)

asarian

25th July 2010, 16:51

A comment on the nVidia stuff....only the new 4xx cards support HD audio bitstreaming. Anything that uses an S/PDIF conncector automatically fails. :)
Yeah, that's what I forget last night. :) Well, you actually can do LPCM over S/PDIF, but only 2.0 sound, LOL. But it seems I've got plenty options left.

SamuriHL

25th July 2010, 16:52

Yeah, that's what I forget last night. :) Well, you actually can do LPCM over S/PDIF, but only 2.0 sound, LOL. But it seems I've got plenty options left.

Yup. So long as Cinavia stays aware from the software players. Otherwise, you can always go the freeware route, and the nVidia 4xx and ATI 5xxx cards both work fine with ffdshow for bitstreaming.

asarian

25th July 2010, 17:05

I don't think it's likely to be in AnyDVD, either, from what James has said. Maybe it'll be a feature in CloneBD. I really don't know. Just going by what was said in the SlySoft thread. I trust that the SlyGods will figure it out, though. They have a very good track record with this sort of thing. ;)
Well, for our consideration, even if someone manages to 'remove' it from the audio-stream, the resulant audio-stream will have to be re-sampled at a higher bitrate than the original; if not, you'll lose quality. So, size-wise, that might become an issue, too.

Also, what will a future CloneBD re-sample it to? DTS-MA is pretty proprietary stuff; I'm not really in the audio-field, so correct me if I'm wrong, but I haven't seen DTS-MA encoders yet out there (at least not for public use). LPCM seems like a good alternative; but that's gonna eat into space like crazy.

SamuriHL

25th July 2010, 17:08

Well, for our consideration, even if someone manages to 'remove' it from the audio-stream, the resulant audio-stream will have to be re-sampled at a higher bitrate than the original; if not, you'll lose quality. So, size-wise, that might become an issue, too.

Also, what will a future CloneBD re-sample it to? DTS-MA is pretty proprietary stuff; I'm not really in the audio-field, so correct me if I'm wrong, but I haven't seen DTS-MA encoders yet out there (at least not for public use). LPCM seems like a good alternative; but that's gonna eat into space like crazy.

All good questions. None of which I have an answer for. :) We'll have to hang in there until they let us know what the plan is. All I know is that James said they plan on removing it. No specifics. But earlier in the same thread he said it'd likely be impossible for AnyDVD to do it on the fly.

laserfan

25th July 2010, 17:20

James said they plan on removing it. I believe he is not one to over-commit, so this surprises me! Talk about sticking one's neck out!

Perhaps they looked hard at DVD-Audio or similar and determined some time ago that they knew how to do it, but never bothered because the effort was too great for the tiny market or something.

SamuriHL

25th July 2010, 17:32

I believe he is not one to over-commit, so this surprises me! Talk about sticking one's neck out!

Perhaps they looked hard at DVD-Audio or similar and determined some time ago that they knew how to do it, but never bothered because the effort was too great for the tiny market or something.

I've no idea. I just know that eventually, they always win. :) That's a simply remarkable team and I have nothing but respect for what they're capable of. We'll see what they cook up for Cinavia. :)

setarip_old

25th July 2010, 19:46

@laserfan

Hi! Perhaps they looked hard at DVD-Audio or similar and determined some time ago that they knew how to do it, but never bothered because the effort was too great for the tiny market or something.The 2001 white paper that I've provided a link to earlier in this thread presented the SUCCESSFUL results of various teams challenged to overcome 4 different types of audio watermarking.

MPAA and "Verance" (now "Cinavia") jointly supposedly tried to suppress the findings.

If not already underway, it's my supposition that another such "challenge", not limited to one decryption provider, will be just what the doctor ordered ;>}

sub24ox7

25th July 2010, 23:08

As for the DTS-HD encoder there is one made by DTS and I have it and use it frequently but it is extremely expensive! Dolby's true-HD encoder or media encoder is cheaper at 995 dollars.

SamuriHL

27th July 2010, 00:04

The time limit appears to be set by the studios. For example, the PS3 can detect it in under a minute if that's the predetermined time frame. That triggers an error message 1 pretty quick and kills the playback entirely. Message 3 is what you get for retail/rental BD releases and they give you a wonderful grace period of 20 minutes. Maybe that's a teaser to get you hooked on the movie. LOL! Anyway, yea, Q3? I'd say that's not impossible. I really don't know how long it'll take. But it's certainly not going to be done "on the fly". It'll require remastering and quite probably decoding of the audio. Won't that be fun.

setarip_old

27th July 2010, 00:35

Further to my thought that: if not already underway, it's my supposition that another such "challenge", not limited to one decryption provider, will be just what the doctor ordered - I find it curious that "Fengtao" has thusfar been completely silent regarding the "Verance"/"Cinavia" audio watermark protection...

SamuriHL

27th July 2010, 00:38

As has Mike Chen with MakeMKV. I'm curious as to what they will do with this thing if anything.

SamuriHL

27th July 2010, 01:22

Personally I don't mind paying a REASONABLE price for a blu-ray. The quality is great. Lately I've been renting movies when they come out and then wait 2 or 3 months for the sales to hit. I've gotten a LOT of blu-rays lately for 10-15 bucks USD. I consider that reasonable.

HOWEVER, I do wish to have backups of those discs. I've found that blu-ray is not very forgiving when it comes to scratches and fingerprints. The slightest defect and it simply won't be read on the average PC BD drive. The PS3 is more forgiving but I'd rather use my HTPC's. So, as soon as I buy them if they're a movie I'm going to watch "regularly" I rip it to my hard drive as an MKV. I can honestly say that if my ability to backup my media were hampered in any real way, I'd be buying less and less and renting more and more. After all, with a netflix subscription you can have any movie you want delivered to you in a day. And if it's defective, you simply get it replaced. I'd hate to stop buying movies cause I do like supporting the studios and actors/actresses that bring us entertainment, but, again, if I can't backup that investment, then the deal's off. Rentals are not going to bring them the revenue that they currently enjoy.

My point in all that is that if Cinavia or any other DRM ruins my ability to enjoy the media I buy in the way I want, I'll simply stop buying it and they will lose sales. So far, Cinavia doesn't look like it's going to impact me in the slightest, so, status quo for now.

Guest

27th July 2010, 03:20

I have deleted some rule 6 discussion.

No discussion of such stuff is allowed, for any purpose.

SamuriHL

27th July 2010, 03:24

My bad. Sorry about that. I'll avoid that topic from now on.

Guest

27th July 2010, 03:28

Thanks for your understanding.

fengtao

27th July 2010, 10:09

We at DVDFab are aware of the issue and looking for a solution for now.

Xperience

27th July 2010, 13:42

Don't know if i can post it here. If not sorry about it.

Lately i read a lot of the new watermark protection in Blu-ray players.
I've red that players from 2009 till now has it mostly through a firmware update.

I can buy from someone a LG BD370 (2009) cheap.
So i thought i would buy it to play some of my AVCHD DL movies and BD-R (future).
Can anyone confirm if LG also uses Cinavia in their firmwares ?

Thanks!

b66pak

27th July 2010, 18:33

any device with bluray logo have to implement it...
_

rotty

27th July 2010, 18:59

We need an up to date list of disks that contain the abomination and boycott them.

Sending a signal for this and future.

They will soon get the message that they are attacking the good guys.

setarip_old

27th July 2010, 21:01

@rotty

As I see it, the problem with identifying such BluRay discs is that, for the time being, there are a limited number of hardware devices (mostly updated PS3s) presently owned that will react to "Cinavia" and thereby identify such a disc with certainty.

I also would anticipate a problem with "false positives" being posted - by those who have obtained something other than a legitimate, commercial Blu-Ray disc.

I would hope that while "the pros" are developing a "cure", they would initially discover and provide a means of identifying such discs, regardless of playback system...

SamuriHL

27th July 2010, 21:09

I've asked for the same thing...some way of identifying the discs that have it with a scanner of some sort. That leaves nothing to chance. We'll see if that happens.

setarip_old

28th July 2010, 22:02

From what I've read today, the newly released "Repo Men" contains "Cinavia" watermarking.

Possibly on the bright side, if the information from the following link/thread is true, it's as simple as unchecking the "Chapters" box in (certain versions of) MKVMergeGUI to eliminate the "Cinavia" in MKV versions you may have created from your actual BluRay discs.

http://ps3mediaserver.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=7220

It would be good if some member(s) could confirm the following:

1) The/A legitimate version of the BluRay disc of "Repo Men" DOES contain "Cinavia" protection, and

2) The information at the thread I've provided a link to actually is successful at cleanly eliminating the "Cinavia" protection from it.

SamuriHL

28th July 2010, 22:06

That chapter nonsense has already been disproven. It's more likely they had header compression removal turned on which caused their issues.

setarip_old

28th July 2010, 22:37

Regarding the header compression, that is something I pointed out, in another Doom9 Forum thread, the other day - and it doesn't necessarily obviate other possibilities that may also exist.

However, in this instance, the poster stated: I just went to watch Repo Men and got struck down with the Cinavia WARNING Certainly, the header compression situation wouldn't generate a "Cinavia" onscreen warning.

So, as long as it's no skin off anyone's nose, I'd repeat:

It would be good if some member(s) could confirm (or refute) whether each of the following is correct:

1) The/A legitimate version of the BluRay disc of "Repo Men" DOES contain "Cinavia" protection, and

2) The information at the thread I've provided a link to actually is successful at cleanly eliminating the "Cinavia" protection from it.

http://ps3mediaserver.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=7220

SamuriHL

28th July 2010, 22:47

Take it for what it's worth:

http://forum.slysoft.com/showpost.php?p=272750&postcount=680

setarip_old

28th July 2010, 23:01

As I said, it doesn't necessarily obviate other possibilities that may also exist.

As we've seen in the past, there can be numerous different releases of the same title (one disc, two disc, different regions, sellthroughs, rental, etc.) at the same time - with differing or no protection schemes...

SamuriHL

28th July 2010, 23:02

I didn't suggest it did. I simply was giving you one user's account of playing a backup of his purchased disc. :)

setarip_old

29th July 2010, 01:11

Hopefully, enough responses will be posted (regarding actual BluRays as the original sources) so that we can all get a clear(er) picture of what has or hasn't been done by Universal with this release with regard to "Cinavia" - and whether or not someone has stumbled upon a fix for the present iteration of it...

SamuriHL

29th July 2010, 01:16

Given my testing with the US retail release of The Losers, I can tell you right now that the "just remove the chapters" nonsense is NOT going to have any affect on this protection whatsoever. It's embedded in the audio track. This is a fact. I've gone so far as to re-encode it into a very low quality 2 channel AAC and it still triggered Cinavia on my PS3. There were no chapters involved in that re-encode. What's badly needed is a way to definitively tell if a disc contains Cinavia without having to resort to making a backup and running it through a Cinavia enabled device. But so far, there hasn't been any evidence I've seen that any of the titles released this week in the US contain Cinavia. Looks like maybe The Losers was a test. Unfortunately, so far, it seems like a successful one. :)

SamuriHL

29th July 2010, 02:37

http://forum.slysoft.com/showthread.php?t=41885

I'm trying to find out how they tested The Runaways, but, it's reported (region A) to have Cinavia on it.

Nic

29th July 2010, 06:58

Yup, it's very resilient. Just to test that, it seems adding reverb or flanger or echo has no effect and it still will be detected.

Shifting the pitch got around the detection, but all these are very destructive processes.

I think once someone can detect the protection accurately they will probably be able to remove/break it too.

SamuriHL

29th July 2010, 13:58

setarip_old

29th July 2010, 18:20

@nic

Hi! Shifting the pitch got around the detection

(Pun intended) SOUNDS like this could be a big step in the right direction ;>}

b66pak

29th July 2010, 18:35

this is a VERY wrong approach...why butchering an already butchered audio (watermarked)?..you will end up with some CAM audio quality...where is the HD audio everyone likes in this?..the right think to do is to leave audio as it is and buy a linux based NMT which will play this backups...or custom firmwares for disabling the detection...
_

SamuriHL

29th July 2010, 18:39

I've already said I plan on doing absolutely nothing about Cinavia, so... :) I just find it interesting that pitch changes break detection. I don't see that in and of itself as a means to defeat it. Simply an interesting insight into how the detection works. Considering there's only 1 confirmed disc with this stuff on it anyway, it's not really a big issue at the moment. However, given that the "test" seems to be successful so far you can probably bet on seeing more discs soon. As a result it makes sense to have some method of playing backups that doesn't involve Cinavia detection. My preferred method is an HTPC with open source software. Older BD players are another possible solution, at least for now. Some day someone will find a way to non-destructively remove it. Until then, it remains an interesting case study in content protection. At least to me. :)

Guest

29th July 2010, 19:37

We shouldn't break it too early. Wait until the player base is too large for them to change it based on vulnerabilities we expose in these early disks.

b66pak

29th July 2010, 19:49

again:

considering that watermaked audio IS NOT an encryption-decryption problem and is effective against rebuilding could a moderator move this thread to rebuilding forum?
_

Guest

29th July 2010, 19:54

Not strictly decryption but it seems more appropriate here. Does it really matter?

b66pak

29th July 2010, 20:00

i think it matter...people going PRO with some rebuilding tools need to be aware that will be some heavy problems...
_

setarip_old

29th July 2010, 20:14

I concur with "Neuron2" - especially since there is already a similar thread that includes posts expressing concern about potential rebuilding problems posed by "Cinavia", in the BD Rebuilder sub-forum.

(Perhaps there would be no cause for attempted hairsplitting if this sub-forum was renamed "Decryption/Copy Protection")

jdobbs

30th July 2010, 01:36

i think it matter...people going PRO with some rebuilding tools need to be aware that will be some heavy problems...
_ I gotta' ask... do you have a vested interest in Cinavia being successful? Maybe I'm seeing something that isn't there -- but you sure seem to want this to sound more serious that it seems to be from my perspective. "Heavy problems" -- c'mon, that's a little premature don't you think when we're talking about one disc?

By the way, if you're talking about BD "Rebuilder" when you say "rebuilding tools"... there is no "PRO" (and probably never will be)... and it wouldn't matter anyway since BD Rebuilder doesn't do any kind of copy protection removal anyway (watermarking or otherwise -- and never will). So I certainly can't see why it would be appropriate to move it over there????

setarip_old

31st July 2010, 07:45

It's been 10 days since I started this thread and the only specifically confirmed report of "Cinavia" on the "Losers" BluRay disc that I've seen here or elsewhere has been regarding playback on a PS3. (As I mentioned, neither my SONY BDP S360 nor PowerDVD7.3 exhibited any indication of "Cinavia")

Is it possible that, despite the claims at this forum and others, the statement "all players manufactured starting with the third quarter of 2009" will be required to contain the necessary "Cinavia" reader component(s)" is Bovine Scatology?

I ask this because, despite such statements, a cursory review of the licensing page of AACS LA at:

http://www.aacsla.com/license/

yields the following opening statement:
Home » License AACS
Licensed content participants can use the AACS technology to protect content they distribute on next generation optical media. Licensed Adopters can manufacture, produce, and sell products that are AACS compliant.

Although I haven't as yet read the 187 page "Final Adopter Agreement", this statement appears to indicate that adoption of the "Cinavia" technology is OPTIONAL.

BTW Contrary to a recent posting about whether the Blu-Ray logo could appear on hardware not including the "Cinavia" component(s), it appears that the Blu-Ray logo is owned by the "Blu-Ray Disc Association", which has no direct connection to AACS LA...

asarian

31st July 2010, 07:52

Given my testing with the US retail release of The Losers, I can tell you right now that the "just remove the chapters" nonsense is NOT going to have any affect on this protection whatsoever.
And whoever even suggested so is an idiot; because this also affects streaming on the PS3 of a single m2ts file (with the main feature in it), which has no chapters at all.

asarian

31st July 2010, 08:17

I gotta' ask... do you have a vested interest in Cinavia being successful? Maybe I'm seeing something that isn't there -- but you sure seem to want this to sound more serious that it seems to be from my perspective. "Heavy problems" -- c'mon, that's a little premature don't you think when we're talking about one disc?
Conversely, may I ask, do you have a vested interested in downplaying the problem? Because I most certainly foresee "heavy problems" indeed; especially when HDMI video/audio card makers are also 'forced' to build this into their video/audio chips as well.

By the way, if you're talking about BD "Rebuilder" when you say "rebuilding tools"... there is no "PRO" (and probably never will be)... and it wouldn't matter anyway since BD Rebuilder doesn't do any kind of copy protection removal anyway (watermarking or otherwise -- and never will).
In other words, soon people can't use your BD 'Rebuilder' any more to make legitimate backups of their Blu-Rays. That may not present a problem to you, but the very existence of Cinavia on a backup effectively renders that backup useless (for regular playback on a Blu-Ray player). And since you're in the business of rebuilding BD's, you'd think you'd be worried too.

Don't get me wrong. I'm not suggesting you try and remove any copy protection scheme into your software. I'm just saying that the inability to make backups (or, in my case, the inability to stream from my media server) is a matter that affects us all.

And lastly, the problem simply is big; if for nothing else, because even if it's cracked tomorrow, the concept of extracting a lossless audio track will be a thing of the past.

setarip_old

31st July 2010, 08:17

@asarian

Hi! And whoever even suggested so is an idiot

In light of the fact that we presently have no way of knowing whether (as it was with Avatar) there were several different versions of the "Losers" BluRay released, we can't say with certainty that there wasn't a version that included a simplified, non-watermark protection scheme involving chapters, subtitles, or anything else.

BTW referring to others as "idiots", especially when they're trying to be helpful, is simply rude and shortsighted...

asarian

31st July 2010, 08:33

@asarian

In light of the fact that we presently have no way of knowing whether (as it was with Avatar) there were several different versions of the "Losers" BluRay released, we can't say with certainty that there wasn't a version that included a simplified, non-watermark protection scheme involving chapters, subtitles, or anything else.

Fair enough. But then we're not talking about Cinavia any more, but about some other, totally unrelated, protection scheme. Unless radical new discoveries have been made which tie Cinavia to chapter info, we do know it's in the audio. And since Cinavia was reportedly detected while streaming as well, the only obvious conclusion must be that it cannot possible be in the chapter info.

setarip_old

31st July 2010, 08:42

@asarian

I guess you just don't get it - What if this "ruse" copy protection scheme involving chapters includes the word "CINAVIA" appearing on screen - and possibly even turns off the audio?

At this juncture, as I've alluded to previously, we haven't seen or heard about any meaningful number of proven "Cinavia"-affected players - only the PS3 (Read my Post #129)

asarian

31st July 2010, 08:53

@asarian

I guess you just don't get it - What if this "ruse" copy protection scheme involving chapters includes the word "CINAVIA" appearing on screen - and possibly even turns off the audio?
I think you're stretching a bit here, just to argue that something Cinavia could also be inside chapters. Sure, there's always the theoretical possibility; but who would care? If that were the case, obviously it wouldn't just be in the chapter info, as that would make Cinavia extremely simple to circumvent (chapters can either be removed or rebuilt with great ease). And if it's also in the audio (which it is), then having it also in the chapter info would be utterly pointless.

setarip_old

31st July 2010, 09:18

Never mind...

Peer van Heuen

31st July 2010, 10:47

Although I haven't as yet read the 187 page "Final Adopter Agreement", this statement appears to indicate that adoption of the "Cinavia" technology is OPTIONAL.

Recently I read through part of the agreement (didn't manage the whole thing, this type of document tends to make me sick).
From what I understoood, it is optional for disc manufacturers to embed it but the detection is mandatory for any "Licensed Access Product".
That agreement also has a clause that requires the licensee to adopt any future changes to the agreement or otherwise to opt out of the whole thing. I do feel sorry for all those who signed it.

So the way I see it, all players will have it soon.
Given the langage of these documents (§1: all apples are green, §1a: exceptions given in §41 apply, §41: except for apples listed in §541a, some apples that conform to §51: may also be red or of unspecified color, .... you know what I mean...), there's always a chance I may have misread something, but I don't think so.

asarian

31st July 2010, 11:48

On a Dutch PS3 forum I frequent someone just shared this (unconfirmed) report: *

"In order to watch your movie with sound you need to rewind just a bit when you receive the [Cinavia] message. And then, just before the message re-appears wind forward a bit, past where you would get the message. Then the software can't pick up on the stream any more, and you can watch your movie with audio, after all."

I'm amazed, for one, that there's not some kind of media-change detection (as in: the PS3 realizing you're still trying to play the same movie). Why, if this is true, it opens possibilities. :)

* Translated by me, of course.

jdobbs

31st July 2010, 14:43

Never mind... You're wasting your breath in discussing this nonsense with some of these folks. The sky is falling and no one will ever convince them otherwise. Either that or they have a vested interest and are spreading silliness to somehow get "Cinavia" mentioned in as many threads as possible so the non-technicals will start running scared.

Meanwhile everybody else will continue backing up their blu-rays as this whole thing shrinks steadily into obscurity (where it belongs).

Conversely, may I ask, do you have a vested interested in downplaying the problem?
Anyone who has ever actually produced freeware with voluntary donations knows that they would make more money mowing a lawn... :( In other words, I go further in the hole every week just by throwing money away to buy blu-rays for testing -- as I did when I bought "The Losers" only to find that it backed up fine to BD-25 using nothing but AnyDVD HD alone. I played it back on my Sony S360 (which I've seen reported to have Cinavia included in the latest firmware). To make it even worse, I had to watch the whole thing just to be sure -- and the movie completely sucks and may actually be the catalyst for a new "worst acting in a villian" Oscar. So if I had a vested interest, I guess it would be a hope that this garbage actually was as hideous as you all wish, so I could go back to doing something worthwhile and profitable with my time. :)

But, I'm confident that the clever people at Slysoft will make short work of this thing... assuming it ever even gets off the ground.

I'm outta' here.

SamuriHL

31st July 2010, 15:05

Recently I read through part of the agreement (didn't manage the whole thing, this type of document tends to make me sick).
From what I understoood, it is optional for disc manufacturers to embed it but the detection is mandatory for any "Licensed Access Product".
That agreement also has a clause that requires the licensee to adopt any future changes to the agreement or otherwise to opt out of the whole thing. I do feel sorry for all those who signed it.

So the way I see it, all players will have it soon.
Given the langage of these documents (§1: all apples are green, §1a: exceptions given in §41 apply, §41: except for apples listed in §541a, some apples that conform to §51: may also be red or of unspecified color, .... you know what I mean...), there's always a chance I may have misread something, but I don't think so.

Oh man, I can't believe you actually went and read that! :p That's something that would give me a migraine. Thanks for the info, though, that's very enlightening and slightly depressing. Still, we apparently have time as so far there's only one or maybe two discs that contain this at the moment. From what I read it looks as though all the studios have signed on to use it at some point. So we can expect to see more of it going forward.

laserfan

31st July 2010, 16:29

I'm outta' here.Say it ain't so--we need all the rational, calming perspectives we can get!

Regarding your "Losers" straight (decrypted) copy, you said:
I played it back on my Sony S360 (which I've seen reported to have Cinavia included in the latest firmware).Not sure what you're saying here. That the reports of Cinavia in the latest firmware (when did it come out?) are bogus?

SamuriHL

31st July 2010, 16:37

There are only 2 players that are confirmed to have cinavia detection at this point in time. The PS3 is the obvious one, but, the LG BD550 is another that contains it. The S360 with the 007 firmware does not contain it.

fengtao

31st July 2010, 17:36

There are more players which have Cinavia detector, please check it out at http://forum.dvdfab.com/showthread.php?t=7102

SamuriHL

31st July 2010, 17:43

Thanks! That's good information to keep track of. :) I know it seems silly to worry about it when "only one disc" has it, but, that seems like a very short sighted mentality to me. It seems clear that The Losers region A discs (and probably other regions) was a test to see how well it'd work in the real world and whether people would complain about audio quality. I think it's safe to say their test was successful in their eyes and that we'll likely see this on more discs in the next few months. And more players. Keeping track of players that already have it enabled seems like a wise thing just to give those in the market for a player options on what to buy depending on if they care about cinavia or not. I see nothing wrong with being prepared and thinking ahead, personally.

musicman2311

31st July 2010, 19:27

setarip_old

31st July 2010, 19:40

@fengtao

Thank you for continuing to unselfishly share your "Cinavi"-related information with the Community ;>}

It will be interesting to see how many varieties of "Cinavi" eventually appear - and what tools are developed and how complex or simple they will be...

A.Fenderson

31st July 2010, 19:43

hi all, I assume Cinavia is likely a very low frequency signal. For those who have a copy and want to test it, run the audio through a steep high pass filter with corner frequency of 20 Hz or so - i would be very eager to learn if that has an effect

If they're restricting the signal to frequencies that low, it's probably only for the home-release type Cinavia signalling. I don't think most pro camcorder mics' frequency ranges extend that low, much less integrated cam mics--so if the low-end is used, it seems far more likely it would be for the type of signal used home releases, while the movie-theater signal would have to be in a range that's likely to be picked up by the cheapest of integrated cam mics. Which implies they can imbed a signal in the audible range for theaters that most people will never notice, which to me implies they would necessarily limit all signalling types to this audible range so as to make it far more difficult to remove any signal type without degrading or destroying the audio. :)

musicman2311

1st August 2010, 09:20

If they're restricting the signal to frequencies that low, it's probably only for the home-release type Cinavia signalling. I don't think most pro camcorder mics' frequency ranges extend that low, much less integrated cam mics--so if the low-end is used, it seems far more likely it would be for the type of signal used home releases, while the movie-theater signal would have to be in a range that's likely to be picked up by the cheapest of integrated cam mics. Which implies they can imbed a signal in the audible range for theaters that most people will never notice, which to me implies they would necessarily limit all signalling types to this audible range so as to make it far more difficult to remove any signal type without degrading or destroying the audio. :)

good point!

mike20021969

1st August 2010, 09:45

I read on fengtao's link that it survives pitch-shift.
it is supposed to resist various transformations of the audio stream like re-compression, analog playback&record, re-sampling, pitch shift
Yet, I have read on SlySoft forum that pitch-shift defeats it.
The only thing I've seen so far that "works" is pitch adjustment
http://forum.slysoft.com/showpost.php?p=273114&postcount=739

Bit of confusion there.

scharfis_brain

1st August 2010, 10:13

you should clarify what is meant by the term 'pitch shift'.

A simple speed change (slowdown / speedup) or a timestretching operation?

Peer van Heuen

1st August 2010, 10:28

I read on fengtao's link that it survives pitch-shift.

Yet, I have read on SlySoft forum that pitch-shift defeats it.

http://forum.slysoft.com/showpost.php?p=273114&postcount=739

Bit of confusion there.

Simple: there's pitch shift and there's pitch shift.
You can speed up by 5% or you can speed up 10 times. Of course there's a difference.
All watermarking methods will stop working at a certain speed factor.
Usually the detectors are required to do additional checking for higher/lower speeds, typically the range up to +/-10% is specifically tested for.
In other words: the watermark is not robust against pitch shifting by nature, this robustness has to be achieved "manually" though the detector.

mike20021969

1st August 2010, 11:25

All watermarking methods will stop working at a certain speed factor.
Thanks.
That's what I was sort of wanting to ask. Of course, no-one would want the audio on a movie to sound like everyone was on Helium - or the opposite.
(I think it was asked on the SlySoft forum what the pitch was changed to when the watermark avoided detection).

SamuriHL

1st August 2010, 15:12

mike20021969

1st August 2010, 16:38

The quote you read on SlySoft was from me
I knew that :cool:
Didn't realise about the earlier mentioning (far too many pages/replies to trawl through).

SamuriHL

1st August 2010, 16:41

I knew that :cool:

Right, but, it was the part about the fact that I got that information from an earlier post in this thread that wasn't known apparently. :) See here:

http://forum.doom9.org/showpost.php?p=1421548&postcount=118

rotty

1st August 2010, 17:19

hi all, I assume Cinavia is likely a very low frequency signal. For those who have a copy and want to test it, run the audio through a steep high pass filter with corner frequency of 20 Hz or so - i would be very eager to learn if that has an effect

After hearing that f shift destroys the detection I thought the same as you. I too would be interested in notching f below 20Hz. and seeing the result.

The only thing that puts me off the idea that this would work is that as I understand it, this protection is supposed to work with camcorder copying in Cinema's, If that is the case, then it''s unlikely to to be the solution as most camcorder mic's would probably not even pick those frequencies up.

It is however possible that the system used on BD is not that same system.

It is worth trying, if only to eliminate, but not forever eh.

It is also worth considering 3rd to 5th harmonic modulation. i.e. differential between them / phase / AM.

mike20021969

1st August 2010, 17:59

it was the part about the fact that I got that information from an earlier post in this thread that wasn't known apparently. :) See here:

http://forum.doom9.org/showpost.php?p=1421548&postcount=118
Apologies.
I got my wires crossed. I misread and thought it was the 60+ page SlySoft thread, not this one (hence why I thought too many replies/pages to trawl though. Oops!)

I must get new reading specs :D

setarip_old

1st August 2010, 19:00

@rotty

Hi!It is however possible that the system used on BD is not that same system.Exactly.

As I said in my Post #146 to this thread: It will be interesting to see how many varieties of "Cinavi" eventually appear - and what tools are developed and how complex or simple they will be...

setarip_old

3rd August 2010, 22:47

Although I personally lack the requisite skills, from what I've read at various BluRay industry related websites and user forums such as Doom9, it seems to me that rather than waiting for a probable software player "Cinavia" "update", someone should currently focus on the first known PS3 firmware "Cinavia" "update".

On the other hand, further to the suggestion by the esteemed "neuron2", we've likely only seen a trial balloon, very basic iteration of what "Cinavia" can do. Therefore, it may be beneficial to the community if such initial efforts to overcome it were done in as much of a non-public way as possible.

mikeathome

6th August 2010, 19:57

If you have time, try convert it to a mono signal, so no phase difference between left and right. Need to do this on all 'stereo' channels (Main L+R, Surround L+R for 5.1, + surround back L+R if you have 7.1). Takes some time. If you insert center and LFE only it should not survive either.

I am pretty sure this will kill it, but will kill the audio impression too.
It would explain why it survives all manipulation because you do the same manipulations on both stereo channels and do not change the phase relationship between L and R.

If you embed a signal on L and R channel, with a 180-phase shift relationship it'll be inaudible but still be present and survive all manipulation. This is regardless of the frequency you use.

mike

mike20021969

6th August 2010, 20:40

If you have time, try convert it to a mono signal...I am pretty sure this will kill it
I don't think it will. It wont be that simple.

rotty

6th August 2010, 21:31

If you embed a signal on L and R channel, with a 180-phase shift relationship it'll be inaudible but still be present and survive all manipulation. This is regardless of the frequency you use.

mike

L R 180 out of phase is how old Dolby Pro Logic works, i.e. rear sound encoded in stereo signal. This info is then expaned (non linear) to produce rear mono (normally 2 speaker mono rear).

Peer van Heuen

9th August 2010, 15:08

rotty

11th August 2010, 14:43

Definitely not.
Cinavia can be detected in monophonic audio and also can be detected by looking at one channel of a multichannel sample.

Hi Peer

My question to you is not when or if, it is are you confident this can be removed from audio stream and removed seemlessly at that.

setarip_old

13th August 2010, 02:39

"Cinavia" was not present on a Sony BDP-N460 with Firmware version M02.R.123...

rotty

14th August 2010, 22:03

Hi Peer

My question to you is not when or if, it is are you confident this can be removed from audio stream and removed seemlessly at that.

The no response answers the question.

SamuriHL

14th August 2010, 22:54

The no response answers the question.

Or that he's not around at the moment. ;)

DrinkLyeAndDie

15th August 2010, 00:13

Or that he's not around at the moment. ;)

... or more importantly, why does he have to?

We know what they say about assumptions...

It's just a matter of time before someone finds some way around it.

setarip_old

15th August 2010, 00:45

@rotty

Hi! My question to you is not when or if, it is are you confident this can be removed from audio stream and removed seemlessly at that.

Although I too am desirous of hearing as much meaningful "Cinavia"-related information as possible, your post is confusing to me. Please clarify - What distinction are you trying to make regarding "if" versus "are you confident" this can be removed?

Are you trying to elicit a percentage/confidence level as a response?

BTW - (In addition to the valid remarks #167 and #168 posted here by two Slysoft Forum moderators) In light of the fact that "Peer" is an employee of Slysoft (unless something's changed recently), he may be limited as to what degree of detail he can discuss here regarding things such as "dealing with Cinavia"...

SamuriHL

15th August 2010, 01:18

I'm sure that when Peer has time, he can clarify more if he chooses to. Just because he didn't give an immediate reply does not mean you should jump to rash conclusions. He could be working on important stuff, or he could be lounging on the beach with rum punch for all we know. LOL! Just know that the absence of a response is not meaningful.

setarip_old

15th August 2010, 01:23

@SamuriHL

Perhaps you'd be good enough to make it clear (in your post #170) as to who you are suggesting is "jumping to rash conclusions" - and just which conclusions you believe are "rash"...

SamuriHL

15th August 2010, 01:27

I think it was fairly obvious that I was referring to rotty's "no response = no" comment. I think that's a pretty rash conclusion to jump to. We can't always be available to jump on any forum to answer a post immediately. :) That's all. I meant nothing more than that. I certainly wasn't referring to your comment at all.

Anyway, back to the subject at hand, I've still yet to see any CONFIRMED discs besides the US release of The Losers that contains Cinavia. I would have expected at least one or two more discs by now but maybe the theory that they were testing the market is correct and they're now getting ready to add it to all the good titles coming out this fall. /speculation :D

setarip_old

15th August 2010, 01:50

The following thread appears in the "Audio" subforum here:

http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?p=1425518#post1425518

Although the subject matter starts out pertaining to monaural DTS tracks, it broadens as the thread evolves (Read it all the way through) - and the knowledgable posters may coincidentally be providing some insight regarding "Cinavia" techniques.

It may, therefore, be useful to those posters to this "Cinavia" thread whose posts have made it clear that they have far more technical knowledge of audio than I do ;>}

Peer van Heuen

15th August 2010, 04:39

The no response answers the question.

a) I'm on vacation with limited access to the internet
b) I really don't feel well answering such questions as they are directed at my personal opinion and whatever answer I would be giving wouldn't weigh more than a mere guess or personal feeling.
At the same time, I'll be quoted having said xxx or yyy like I'd made a promise.

Anyway: so far we handled every single problem, so based on that you can do your own guessing at whether I "am confident" or not :)

jdobbs

15th August 2010, 05:43

a) I'm on vacation with limited access to the internet
b) I really don't feel well answering such questions as they are directed at my personal opinion and whatever answer I would be giving wouldn't weigh more than a mere guess or personal feeling.
At the same time, I'll be quoted having said xxx or yyy like I'd made a promise.

Anyway: so far we handled every single problem, so based on that you can do your own guessing at whether I "am confident" or not :) Well said, and for what it's worth you've got my confidence. Gee, and after you spend an inordinate amount of time in order to remove it like some would like you too, we can all sit around backing up "The Losers" over-and-over again in celebration.

Enjoy your vacation. This one can obviously wait til you get back. ;)

SamuriHL

15th August 2010, 15:01

rotty

15th August 2010, 15:57

@rotty

Hi!

Although I too am desirous of hearing as much meaningful "Cinavia"-related information as possible, your post is confusing to me. Please clarify - What distinction are you trying to make regarding "if" versus "are you confident" this can be removed?

Are you trying to elicit a percentage/confidence level as a response?

BTW - (In addition to the valid remarks #167 and #168 posted here by two Slysoft Forum moderators) In light of the fact that "Peer" is an employee of Slysoft (unless something's changed recently), he may be limited as to what degree of detail he can discuss here regarding things such as "dealing with Cinavia"...

The "if" is because Slysoft may be able to beat Cinavia but for various reasons not want to release that tech. Therefore I was not interested in "if" or "when" it would be released, just if he was confident he could beat it.

mike20021969

15th August 2010, 16:07

just if he was confident he could beat it.
According to James at SlySoft, yes.
We're going to remove it.
Source: http://forum.slysoft.com/showpost.php?p=272342&postcount=624

DenkiWasabi

16th August 2010, 02:45

While the confidence from the slysoft team is definitely reassuring, but am rather curious what is the anticipated approach? Since it's been repeated here in several instances that this is not a case of encryption or decryption like BD+, AACS, etc... Did SlySoft gang attain audio or DSP engineering expertise to tackle the audio itself? Or will the solution most likely come from exposing future software players with this support? Really just want to know if we have the original HD audio to look forward to or will everyone be forced to a non HD audio rips.

setarip_old

16th August 2010, 06:03

@DenkiWasabi

Hi!

With such "Slysoft-specific" questions, you'd probably be better off posting them at that company's own forum...

rotty

16th August 2010, 17:03

a) I'm on vacation with limited access to the internet
b) I really don't feel well answering such questions as they are directed at my personal opinion and whatever answer I would be giving wouldn't weigh more than a mere guess or personal feeling.
At the same time, I'll be quoted having said xxx or yyy like I'd made a promise.

Anyway: so far we handled every single problem, so based on that you can do your own guessing at whether I "am confident" or not :)

Hi Peer

Thanks for your reply.

By the way, I was not after your personal opinion, I was interested if you and the team had looked at the problem and knew how to beat it.

Thats all I meant by the word "confident".

Here's wishing you all the best in that endevour.

Jeremy Duncan

18th August 2010, 01:30

"For those wanting and waiting for AnyDVD HD to remove this protection, consider what we have so far:

1. AACS. This encrypts just about all of the data on the disk. Without removing this, most of the data just looks random, and nothing can be done with it. Licensed players must remove this encryption in order to play the content. AnyDVD HD removes this encryption too.

2. BD+. This damages small parts of the data on the disk. Without removing this, most of the data is there to be played, but it is missing a few parts. When played back, there is visible damage to the video stream (and audio?). Licensed players remove this protection so that it can be played without this corruption. AnyDVD HD removes this protection too.

3. Cinavia Audio Watermark. This adds a supposedly unnoticeable echo to the decoded audio. Without removing this, the audio sounds just fine (assuming it is indeed inaudible). Licensed players DO NOT remove this watermark, but instead just look for it. If they find it, they act accordingly, halting playback or just muting audio. Since nothing out there is officially removing the watermark, it would be very hard for Slysoft or anyone else to come up with a way to remove it.

In the end, I agree that this is too big of a job for AnyDVD HD, and should be left to another tool. Instead of just replacing data on a sector by sector basis, removing this watermark will involve the complex task of analyzing large portions of the audio in its decoded form (which means a TrueHD and DTS-MA decoder is needed), removing the watermark from the decoded audio (if that is even possible without damaging it), and then re-encoding the audio again (which means a TrueHD and DTS-MA encoder is needed). Even if the just left the data as raw PCM, that would mean an even more complex re-authoring of the disc data would be needed. Not to mention, if you decode, alter, and re-encode a lossless codec there's no guarantee it will fit in the exact same space as the unaltered audio.

So the question is, will Slysoft attempt such a tool, can they succeed, and will they sell it as a separate product, or give it away for free? Only time will tell. For right now, the best thing to do is to simply avoid using Cinavia enabled players, and those looking to get into Blu Ray should carefully consider their playback device if they intend to play anything other than original discs." - Matt from Anydvd forum

If they make this "Cinavia" available to current software players then it will be broken? How? look in the method it's read and where a part that holds integrity and can break protection if it's broken: copy that part, clone that part.
In current form blu rays are cracked from copying the behavior of the memory, so that the hdcp thinks anydvd is that part of the memory and doesn't realise anydvd is only a Clone of that part of the HDCP system.

But if the Cinavia made tha HDCP HW read the audio then there is nothing inbetween the audio and hw to clone, no sw part needed just hw needed, the hw sees a error that breaks Cinavia and sends a flag to the part downstream of the HW checker and the error message pops up.

Since the media moguls are simple they won't know that once Cinavia is released to Powerdvd then Anydvd can immitate the part Cinavia depends on. :devil: Just wait, Cinavia will be broken the day it's released for Powerdvd/TMTP :)

Guest

18th August 2010, 01:40

Thank you for your incoherent rambling.

SamuriHL

18th August 2010, 01:44

Yea, I don't quite get it either. It's copied verbatim from a post on SlySoft forum and I disagreed with parts of it there, too. I can't really make any sense of it tbh.

Jeremy Duncan

18th August 2010, 02:32

I will repeat what I said in a more coherant manner, I was trying l33t speak but my age showed I didn't know how. :cool:

Here is a quote I found in the anydvd forum:

"They were relying on AACS being strong enough to withstand attempts at breaking it, they were wrong. IIRC a little flaw in a software player allowed the keys to be read from memory, and pandoras box was open."

link (http://forum.slysoft.com/showpost.php?p=271344&postcount=290)

"I don't think getting the watermark out would be feasible. I think the best bet right now is figuring out how the hell the player is detecting the watermark when bitstreaming. If it's doung a double duty of decoding + bitstreaming, that's freaking annoying and if implemented in software players would mean even more extra bloat (not that in hardware players is not bloat either). "

link (http://forum.slysoft.com/showpost.php?p=271821&postcount=439)

"There's a disc ID that can't be copied onto a backup that is used as part of the AACS decryption process. The only reason "protected backups" work is because AnyDVD has the title key for that particular disc. The disc *ALWAYS* gets decrypted and if applicable BD+ protection removed before the player gets it when dealing with backups. I think people get confused with the idea of a "protected backup" somehow magically working with all the protection in place. It simply means that AnyDVD is working its magic on the image in realtime instead of when you ripped it. To the player, a protected image is no different than a ripped, unprotected image. "

link (http://forum.slysoft.com/showpost.php?p=271890&postcount=480)

So this tells me that anydvd acts in realtime by - getting the key + using the key = anydvd acts as key holder in the aacs method.

AnydvdHD then is a form of mimicking, or cloning to impersonate a device to another device through the use of unauthorized id theft.
it stands to reason then, that since the aacs doesn't know that the hdcp id is stolen they will go through the software again in the microsoft operating system.

The cinavia protection is based on the use of a key that is read, and this key adds bloat, so the key will be put through memory that can be read by anydvd.
I think the key is not a single string but a mathermatical model based on folding the audio so the key matches when the fold is correctly in place, thats why it takes 20 minutes for the protection message, it'folding to the preset fold the cinavia is looking for.
This fold though is bloat and so it's put through the memory and even though its folded it still can be read if the design of the fold is met. Then the audio can be immitated and cinavia given a false fold key.

The thing is the error of id theft is through sw players using memory that can be robbed of their id. this error is where the fold can be found.

Guest

18th August 2010, 02:45

The cinavia protection is based on the use of a key that is read, and this key adds bloat, so the key will be put through memory that can be read by anydvd.
I think the key is not a single string but a mathermatical model based on folding the audio so the key matches when the fold is correctly in place, thats why it takes 20 minutes for the protection message, it'folding to the preset fold the cinavia is looking for.
This fold though is bloat and so it's put through the memory and even though its folded it still can be read if the design of the fold is met. Then the audio can be immitated and cinavia given a false fold key. It's still incoherent. But please, DON'T try again.

Jeremy Duncan

18th August 2010, 02:57

It's still incoherent. But please, DON'T try again.

I will try one more time then. Have some patience with me.

The key is hidden is the audio, the audio is mathematically treated like a video, and the video is treated with watermarks over a period of 20 minutes that when folded in a summary mathermatical design creates a key that the player reads and accepts as authentic.
That is why after a new video is put through the fold is already made and a new fold is easier to id as unauthentic because the part the fold should be folding is not present.

I will reword that in case it's too difficult, in point form as I know this is easier to read:
a.) the audio is converted to video using math, this is so the converted audio can be given visable watermarks.
b.) the visable watermarks are displayed over a period of 20 minutes and are incoherant, they must be remuxed. Once they are remuxed they add up to a string that is read by cinavia.
it is impossible to guess the math to remux them, it would take brute force calculations and each test would take 20 minutes for each string tested.
if the string is very long then it would become impossible to guess tring easily.
c.) once the string is made after being remuxed the unremuxed string is still there to id new video to see if it's being converted to a new unremuxed string, that's why the newer video is easily id's more fast than when the video was first played. it's looking for the hash that's being formed.
d.) it's no use looking for the audio mark, it's invisable, it's designed to be counted by abstract methods so strange even my mind can't grasp how they did it. the only way to get the hash is to get in the stored memory where it id's the new video being created and comparing it to the previously made string.

Guest

18th August 2010, 03:09

Thank you for your explanation. It is all perfectly clear to me now.

setarip_old

18th August 2010, 04:01

@Jeremy Duncan

Hi! In current form blu rays are cracked from copying the behavior of the memory, so that the hdcp thinks anydvd is that part of the memory and doesn't realise anydvd is only a Clone of that part of the HDCP system.Sounds nice, but I believe your logic is flawed because it's based on limited knowledge of what's available for decrypting BluRay discs:

While, as I understand it, AnyDVDHD and DVDFab Passkey use drivers to allow realtime playback of original BluRay discs (what you've described) on systems that otherwise would not allow it (e.g. firmware intentionally not updated, Internet connection intentionally avoided), MakeMKV, as well as AnyDVDHD and DVDFab Passkey, are each capable of actually decrypting and ripping fully functional full disc copies of Blu-Ray discs. These can then be burned to disc and/or used to create .ISO image files for playback - Discs for both standalone players and PC software players and .ISO image files mounted for PC software playback.

The burned discs and .ISO image files play properly because, just like a homebrewn Blu-Ray disc would appear, they no longer contain any copy protection - NOT because of anything that's been placed in memory or anything that is "part of the HDPC" system...

BTW - There is nothing, thusfar, to substantiate that 20 minutes is "required" for the "Cinavia" to do its work with Blu-Ray discs. So far, there has been only one Blu-Ray title ("The Losers") confirmed to incorporate "Cinavia" protection and, if I remember correctly, only one person to note that the "Cinavia" message appeared at approximately 20 minutes. For all we know, it could have just as well been set to appear within one SECOND, as it purportedly does with "Cams"...

It would be great if you'd purchase "The Losers" BluRay disc and tried applying your theory to it - and then reported your results back here. Quite honestly, although I follow the gist of your postings, much of what you say is beyond my ken.

Ghitulescu

18th August 2010, 10:13

Cinavia is an interesting issue apparently. The way they intend to DRM the copyrighted work was proposed some 20 years ago by Philips and it was rejected ;)

Some interesting passages from Verance

However, one clear disadvantage of such systems is that the operator provides each consumer with a high quality (typically digital) master copy of the content.
The most viable marking solution embeds information into the content, thereby reducing the likelihood of alteration or removal of the marking information.
Digital watermarks are designed to carry auxiliary information without substantially affecting fidelity of the host signal, or without interfering with normal usage of the host signal.
Unfortunately, however, for the unscrupulous consumer (e.g., pirate), this provides a means to generate illegal copies of content with little effort. Letting the intended recipient know that this embedded information exists may help deter a potential pirate from making illegal use of the content. It will also allow enforcement agencies to track the source of many copies.
While access to an encrypted content may be limited to entities with proper authorization and decryption keys, once a content is decrypted, it may be readily copied and disseminated. This is particularly true for multimedia content that must inevitably be converted to audio and/or visual signals (e.g., analog format) in order to reach an audience. Watermarks are particularly well suited to plug this so-called 'analog hole'.

I find it worrying that the industry considers that is an disadvantage for them to provide us with high quality works (on which we pay a premium price). This is why they changed the "definition of quality" to match the format and not the content, ie the audio quality of something being defined by being in 192kHz/8 channels (a telephone conversation becomes this way a high definition audio if recorded in 192 kHz) or the video quality of a video being FullHD , 1080p (even if it comes from a webcam). The reason being most probably this. No more quality content, but what a nice package.

Even worrier is the corolar, that they believe that the copyright will be extended to last forever.

Guest

18th August 2010, 19:21

OT post removed.

This thread is for discussion of Cinavia, not general discussions of copyright and DRM.

setarip_old

27th August 2010, 22:12

For an interesting read about the apparent underlying (pending) patents regarding "Cinavia", click on the following primary link and then the links in the post by "John Doe":

http://forum.slysoft.com/showpost.php?p=276015&postcount=857

keysersose

31st August 2010, 20:19

rotty

31st August 2010, 21:10

I have made a BD-5 ISO file of the Losers DTS-MA track with a blank Video - it's about 3.1 GB and can be burned onto a DVD-R..

I sent it to Hotfile.com - if anyone wants to download it in order to test for Cinavia on their player please shoot me an email.

I would appreciate it if someone that does have a Cinavia player could download it and confirm the disc does trigger the Cinavia..

mrkeysersose@gmail.com

Its the re encoding of the audio thats going to be the bummer with this.

If cracked, it will probably have to be detected/removed at the analogue level and re encoded.

We will probably have to make do with either AC3 or LPCM audio as a replacement. (no public DTS MA/HD encoders).

Now I am saying probably, but its worth keeping in mind.

Jeremy Duncan

1st September 2010, 06:03

I will tell you how it works, I think:
- The audio has marks in it that are creating a id tag.
- If the audio has the id tag it is authenticated over a period of time, some say 20 minutes for audio that has the code in it.
- If the audio tag has been tagged and is being verified then the tag stream is cut off there is nothing to authenticate, then the cinavia flag goes up.
So if you took audio that took 20 minutes before to get the cinavia flag, then took 5 minutes of thataudio then mixed in 15 minutes of audio with no cinavia, the flag will go up faster than 20 minutes.
Or, if you took a stream that has cinavia but the rest of the audio video stream is not the same quality as the original the audio is tagged but the authentication see's the code is altered from the original so the flag goes up earlier, say a minute or so.

- How to beat cinavia, possibly, or theoretically.
You identify it can cut off streams it finds as unpure compared to the original.
Then, you see how much stream it takes to qualify as unpure compared to the original (1 minutes, 10 minutes, depending on the quality of the ripped material).
Then, you use the stream it has not verified as unpure, find it in the machines memory, and IF the memory is authenticating the stream, see what is authenticating it - if it's a key or what.
That's why using the SW to find the memory then to find the key in the memory is vital to cracking cinavia. Luckily that's how aacs was cracked so if they did it before then they can do it again once Powerdvd or Totalmediatheater updates to use Cinavia.

The hope is once the key is found it can be use to replicate the authentication then mux it into the audio without sacrificing quality so the cinavia finds and and accepts it since the foundation is based in memory, the memory has no conscience and only accepts the physical data it recieves.
But if the audio goes straight to hw then the cinavia is found then passed on to memory, then there is no straight path the the memory and then, well it maight be to strong to crack. :confused:

Ghitulescu

1st September 2010, 12:08

I will tell you how it works, I think:

You don't have to think nor to imagine things, the cinavia watermarking is documented in their patents, which are free and far from being too many ;). BTW However, one clear disadvantage of such systems is that the operator provides each consumer with a high quality (typically digital) master copy of the content.this is an excerpt from one of their patents.

One cannot remove the watermark without damaging the audio, it works like a logo-remover tool.

There are 2 solutions against cinavia:
1. obtain a player that doesn't obey cinavia and resist hard to upgrade it
2. file a class suit (in the US) or petition the EU parliament against cinavia and its use since it unduly restricts the fair use rights

k-c-ksum

1st September 2010, 18:01

has anyone cut the first 20mins out and remuxed to see if cinavia kicks in straight away? Maybe the first 20 mins doesnt have the watermark and it was only embeded from 20mins onwards?

rotty

1st September 2010, 18:42

I dont think many people realise how much this will impact us all.

This is soon going to be the only thing people are talking about on here.

Just keep a mental note of where we are on the time line for the first batch of Cinavia disks (Late Summer 2010).

Ghitulescu touched on fair rights and he's so right, if anybody thinks there is going to be a quick fix for this then I think they are being very optomistic.

For a fix that also keeps the original audio stream type, then, well......

I will not buy a Cinavia Disk. As more and more disks appear then this may well mean I dont buy anymore Blu Ray disks, well so be it.

SamuriHL

1st September 2010, 18:58

That entirely depends on how you consume your media. People need to remember that this is done by the player. The player MUST support Cinavia detection and then ACT upon it. There is no other mechanism for this to work. I can assure you the open source players that do not take their marching orders from the AACS LA will not be implementing Cinavia. :D Current versions of the big 3 software players do not support Cinavia detection, either. So, back to my original statement...if you consume your media on an HTPC, then there is nothing to see here. Is it likely that future versions of the big 3 will add Cinavia detection? Probably. Until we reach that point, keep a backup of your most recent player. Restore it when you need to play a Cinavia infested backup. It's the hardware players and streaming devices that are going to see the biggest impact. That is, once those devices start supporting it, once discs start using it, and you wish to play backups on those devices of discs that contain it.

Ghitulescu

1st September 2010, 19:14

1. obtain a player that doesn't obey cinavia and resist hard to upgrade it

I can assure you the open source players that do not take their marching orders from the AACS LA will not be implementing Cinavia. :D Current versions of the big 3 software players do not support Cinavia detection, either. So, back to my original statement...if you consume your media on an HTPC, then there is nothing to see here. Is it likely that future versions of the big 3 will add Cinavia detection? Probably. Until we reach that point, keep a backup of your most recent player. Restore it when you need to play a Cinavia infested backup. It's the hardware players and streaming devices that are going to see the biggest impact. That is, once those devices start supporting it, once discs start using it, and you wish to play backups on those devices of discs that contain it.
That is solution one. :)

But, they have a winning card: time.

The most efficient solution is the second one. Because it kills the winning card....
2. file a class suit (in the US) or petition the EU parliament against cinavia and its use since it unduly restricts the fair use rights

It's time to bill (in the States) for the 28th Amendment (much in the sense of the 6th const. art.) for a separation of the state from the media content producers ;) like it is supposed to be between state and church.

SamuriHL

1st September 2010, 19:19

Well, I've said before and it bears repeating....if they screw up my ability to consume the media I purchase the way I like, I will quite frankly purchase less and rent more. At least with renting if a disc gets scratched or otherwise damaged, I can send it back and get a replacement the next day and it doesn't cost me a dime. The only incentive I have to purchase movies is that I can build up my library of MKV's on my HTPC and share them around my network so that I can access my entire library without the need to get up and put the disc into whatever machine I'm using to watch a movie. If they succeed in preventing me from protecting my investment AND allowing me to consume my purchased media, then they only hurt their bottom line.

rotty

1st September 2010, 19:27

SamuriHL

1st September 2010, 19:36

Its amaizing that they have produced a good product but have still managed a way to screw it up.

I am absolutley convinced that if you gave them a gun, they would take it in their hand, point it at their foot and pull the trigger.

I would be hard pressed to argue differently. :) I get the need to stop pirates. I do. But at the expense of hurting your paying customers? Mmmmmm, not so much. Ask the music industry how well that went for them. I love Blu-ray as a format. The PQ and AQ are the best we get at home bar none. But, this kind of nonsense is going to kill it. It really is.

rotty

1st September 2010, 19:47

I would be hard pressed to argue differently. :) I get the need to stop pirates. I do. But at the expense of hurting your paying customers? Mmmmmm, not so much. Ask the music industry how well that went for them. I love Blu-ray as a format. The PQ and AQ are the best we get at home bar none. But, this kind of nonsense is going to kill it. It really is.

I agree.

DVD was a vast improvement vision and sound on VHS and everybody could appreciate it, not only that, the format was robust and long lasting physically.

The move from DVD to Blu Ray is not quite the same.

People are fine with DVD, its good enough and cheap enough for most people, even with their large sets.

It is people like all of us that are Blu Ray's customers, they need the real enthusiasts to make it succeed or fail.

And guess what they are doing to themselves.

By the way, we should also treat with same contempt the manufactures that implement it on the players. Don’t but any of their products, and I do mean ANY, NONE.

And yes I know that some would say manufactures have no choice, untrue and DONT CARE, DONT BUY.

derbeDeus

1st September 2010, 20:04

has anyone cut the first 20mins out and remuxed to see if cinavia kicks in straight away? Maybe the first 20 mins doesnt have the watermark and it was only embeded from 20mins onwards?

all of it has the watermark. you can convince yourself of that by skipping back after playing at 1x any 20 minutes of the movie.

to understand better the 20 minues thing imagine a bucket that you fill with water. time is the water in this case. when you play at 1x, the water is poured into the bucket. every time the 20 minutes mark is reached, the water stops and the audio is muted. when you skip, play at faster speed, pause or use another soundtrack (french, spanish, etc), the water leaks out of the bucket and the audio is enabled again. when you change to english, 1x, the water starts pouring again. 20 minutes mark => mute.

keysersose

1st September 2010, 20:17

all of it has the watermark. you can convince yourself of that by skipping back after playing at 1x any 20 minutes of the movie.

to understand better the 20 minues thing imagine a bucket that you fill with water. time is the water in this case. when you play at 1x, the water is poured into the bucket. every time the 20 minutes mark is reached, the water stops and the audio is muted. when you skip, play at faster speed, pause or use another soundtrack (french, spanish, etc), the water leaks out of the bucket and the audio is enabled again. when you change to english, 1x, the water starts pouring again. 20 minutes mark => mute.

Assuming this is how it works, why would they go 20 minutes before Cinavia gets triggered ? why not just every 60 seconds?

With DVD-Audio, depending on the player - the trigger typically happened at the 15 or 30 second mark of the 1st song - my current Denon triggers it at the 1:00 mark..

derbeDeus

1st September 2010, 21:28

Assuming this is how it works, why would they go 20 minutes before Cinavia gets triggered ? why not just every 60 seconds?

With DVD-Audio, depending on the player - the trigger typically happened at the 15 or 30 second mark of the 1st song - my current Denon triggers it at the 1:00 mark..

The 20 mins may just be a PS3 thing. I haven't access to other Cinavia player.
On their site (http://www.cinavia.com/languages/english/pages/message3.html), they mention 10 minutes to be the grace period for "professionally produced" audio in homemade video.

SamuriHL

1st September 2010, 21:34

Or it could be studio dependent. Not knowing fully how it works we don't really know where the time limit comes from. On message 1 titles it's reported that it happens almost immediately. I think they consider the 20 minute thing an extended preview. :D

keysersose

1st September 2010, 21:51

guess they want to make sure you watch long enough - hook you into the movie, so that you will go out and buy a legit copy..

Didn't work on the Losers BTW..:)

setarip_old

1st September 2010, 21:56

Depending on just how creative the Verance people can be with Cinavia, I'd guess that in addition to the demise of "cams", there will be a lot of studio employees embarrassed (maybe fired) when they are readily identified as distributors of "screeners" that have been seeded with individual identifying watermarks...

keysersose

1st September 2010, 22:18

By the way, we should also treat with same contempt the manufactures that implement it on the players. Don’t but any of their products, and I do mean ANY, NONE.

And yes I know that some would say manufactures have no choice, untrue and DONT CARE, DONT BUY.

I agree with you 100% here..as of late I have been a Denon fan, but not a chance in hell I'll buy their player if they add this feature..

I'm telling family and friends NOT to buy a BR player just yet - wait till this sorts itself out - then get a HDMI 1.4 , 3D capable - comfirmed Cinavia free player and they should be good for quite awhile...

I'm building a new home that will have 4 surround sound and video setups and I want to standardize on a suitable BR player that meets the above criteria..

deets

1st September 2010, 23:23

its an utter shame how stupid the movie companies are when they pull stunts like this. do they not realise that some of use who buy all our stuff legally and would never pirate a film get utterly peeved with being treated like a criminal.

my DVD collection was quite large, any movie i saw that i liked i would buy. My BR collection? one and that was only to test the player.

If i cant rip the film to play back on any medium i chose, i will not give them my money by purchasing. I rent on an unlimited scheme. If i want to rewatch it i can.

i am curios as if they would ever put this in the PSP as the PS3 is on of the main targets. Im hoping not but you never know.

Ghitulescu

2nd September 2010, 08:01

The 20 mins may just be a PS3 thing. I haven't access to other Cinavia player.
On their site (http://www.cinavia.com/languages/english/pages/message3.html), they mention 10 minutes to be the grace period for "professionally produced" audio in homemade video.

Or it could be studio dependent. Not knowing fully how it works we don't really know where the time limit comes from. On message 1 titles it's reported that it happens almost immediately. I think they consider the 20 minute thing an extended preview. :D

No, it's the time needed for the watermark to be 100% sure detected (it is repeated but it may be masked either by a similar audio spectrum or by "manipulation" ie reencoding etc.).

Actually they claim that 1 min should be enough, but apparently the 10/20 min. have something to do either with fair right (it's about 10%) or with "enraging" the pirates (considering 3-5 min being the studio logos and some other 5 min the intro - the audio blanking starts when the real action starts). :)

Ghitulescu

2nd September 2010, 08:17

Its amaizing that they have produced a good product but have still managed a way to screw it up.

I am absolutley convinced that if you gave them a gun, they would take it in their hand, point it at their foot and pull the trigger.

You're wrong both times: as long as people still buy these things, a singular opinion doesn't count. Besides, what would be the alternative? HDTV Programs, full of commercials? Oh please .... Your own family movies (HDTV camcorder)? You still have to pay the "copy tax" for blanks and you'll get bored soon watching them in a loop ....

Example: For about 1 year now ASTRA (the trademark of SES) asked for an additional fee for technical reasons (ha ha ha) of about 5€. Some providers withdrew from ASTRA (eg to HotBird) but most of them are still in place, they simply passed these costs to their subscribers. As usual in the business.

Example 2: ASTRA again. In collaboration with the private companies in Germany (Pro7, SAT1, RTL Group) they started the HD+ initiative soon after the 5€ affair. Now, it's 50€ a year, the first one being free of charge (to lure people into HD+). In addition to regular HDTV, HD+ provides the mechanisms of:

disabling FFWD (that is generally used for commercial skip in REPLAY mode)
prohibiting the possibility of recording (now it's still permitted)
deleting the recordings after a while (not implemented yet, but since these are laid down encrypted and since no decrypting process is available or allowed...)
prohibiting the transfer of recordings (for archival)

Yet, many people were lured by the free year and due to the rapid acceptance from the industry (Humax, Panasonic, Technisat etc.) the sales of HD+ overrode those of HD. We wait to see what will happen next year :)

derbeDeus

2nd September 2010, 08:50

No, it's the time needed for the watermark to be 100% sure detected (it is repeated but it may be masked either by a similar audio spectrum or by "manipulation" ie reencoding etc.).

Actually they claim that 1 min should be enough, but apparently the 10/20 min. have something to do either with fair right (it's about 10%) or with "enraging" the pirates (considering 3-5 min being the studio logos and some other 5 min the intro - the audio blanking starts when the real action starts). :)

they certainly don't need 20 mins to detect the watermark 100%. read the patent, indeed they say that the confidence can be affected by manipulation, but in the end the 20 min thing is just a policy, same as delayed reporting.

Nic

2nd September 2010, 09:06

rotty

3rd September 2010, 18:22

On the PS3, at least, the 20 min part is just the trigger time you are allowed. Once that trigger has been set off, if you try watching any video clip with cinavia audio it will switch the audio off within a few seconds.

So, in short, the cinavia watermark runs throughout all of the audio and can be detected by the PS3 in seconds.

-Nic

I would think that the PS3 remebers the disk ID and once Cinavia is triggered it will trigger in seconds again for that disk.

If you think about it, it must remeber otherwise the protection would be useless because all you would have to do is stop the disk at the point it is blocked and then start from that point to get another 20 or whatever mins clear. Or worst case eject and jump to point it failed and continue. That would not exactly be a good protection.

It may not remeber the disk forever, there may be a few hours and it clears.

Nic

4th September 2010, 12:20

rotty

4th September 2010, 13:06

My tests weren't not only done using disks, but many file based video clips. There was no way for it to "remember" a Disc ID for those clips - it just can almost instantly detect the signature.

However, you are correct, after a short time (10-20mins) the trigger resets again - and you can continue to watch the video for another 20mins before it triggers again.

-Nic

Hi Nic

Now that is interesting, cant work out how Cinavia embeded info could be pickup up that fast. It would have to be almost continuous data, the only way to do that without it being intrusive would be sub audio info but that would be totally simple to remove so sure aint that.

Perhaps it does remeber the file by looking and storing the headers for the stream, only guessing.

If Cinavia is able to detect almost instantly I would be totally amazed so something else is causing this I would think.

Ghitulescu

4th September 2010, 13:14

Now that is interesting, cant work out how Cinavia embeded info could be pickup up that fast. It would have to be almost continuous data, the only way to do that without it being intrusive would be sub audio info but that would be totally simple to remove so sure aint that.

Perhaps it does remeber the file by looking and storing the headers for the stream, only guessing.

If Cinavia is able to detect almost instantly I would be totally amazed so something else is causing this I would think.

No need to guess. Read the damn patent/s. Cinavia detecting is extremely fast, however, they need a certain time before being 100% certain, as various conditions may change the watermark. Also to avoid false detection.

rotty

4th September 2010, 13:33

No need to guess. Read the damn patent/s. Cinavia detecting is extremely fast, however, they need a certain time before being 100% certain, as various conditions may change the watermark. Also to avoid false detection.

If Cinavia needs time to be sure then that means that audio can be sometimes by interpreted as as Cinavia data as well so repetion is needed to be sure.

So I take it youve read the DAMM patents, can you sum up how Cinavia is emabedded to save us all time in wading thru pages and pages.

setarip_old

4th September 2010, 17:49

@rotty

As I originally posted here several days ago (posted in Post#192 of this thread): For an interesting read about the apparent underlying (pending) patents regarding "Cinavia", click on the following primary link and then the links in the post by "John Doe":

http://forum.slysoft.com/showpost.php?p=276015&postcount=857

happycase

9th September 2010, 20:51

I still have an HD DVD player that can play back AVCHD and HD DVD backups to DVD 9 so maybe I'll just play my backups on that device.

SamuriHL

9th September 2010, 20:53

I just tested my new Panasonic SC-BT230 with the latest (1.50) firmware. No Cinavia. The players and discs that support this thing are far and few between.

kaid

25th September 2010, 19:05

Here's a thought: What's to stop them from putting this onto everything, not only blurays but also downloaded content, and DVDs? It may be part of AACS, but who says that the Bluray-Players are not programmed to either simply ignore it on DVDs or check for CSS instead of AACS? DVD players will not care either way..

Right now, as it is, it is rather pointless, since you can just take the perfect-quality AC3/DTS Audio from the DVD release instead, which supposedly does not have the Cinavia shit....

Someone's gotta be working on Audiofilters for this thing for Virtualdub, Audacity, VST, Coreaudio, whatever.... has anyone figured it out yet how to remove it?

Ajax_Undone

29th September 2010, 07:30

The removal of it is not as simple as it seems.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_watermarking
The signal may be audio, pictures or video, for example. If the signal is copied, then the information is also carried in the copy. A signal may carry several different watermarks at the same time.
Any one of these can trigger it. So in order to find out what it is that triggers the response we must begin at the beginning. The firmware will need to be hijacked and analysed in memory when the event occurs. When we see that event then we can patch around it. Until someone is willing to sacrifice a $300 + PS3 or a Blu-ray player with it as part of the firmware we will never be able to identify it directly.

Ghitulescu

29th September 2010, 08:14

Remember the Sony case some years ago concerning the Audio-CDs? It took only 1 year and it was off.

If the consumers don't buy the Cinavia-infected movies, they would react*, one way or the other**. For me it's much easier, I haven't seen in 2009 and 2010 more than 3 Hollywood movies that I would consider to be good, and I've seen a lot, proportionally Europe and JP/KR are much better.

*The companies usually have a strategy that is internally called: teaching the customer. From their point of view, it's much economically to lure the customer to fit into their policy than to adapt the same to the customer. Maybe it's time for the customers to "teach the studios".

**I'm expecting the worse, like DVD/BD case showed us.

asarian

1st October 2010, 08:08

Remember the Sony case some years ago concerning the Audio-CDs? It took only 1 year and it was off.

If the consumers don't buy the Cinavia-infected movies, they would react*, one way or the other**.

For one, you can't really chose not to buy "Cinavia-infected movies," as you won't know upfront (unless you're willing to wait until someone else bought it and happens to mention it on doom9; which, of course, no regular customer will ever do, and likely a lot of folks on doom9 itself won't either).

The Audio CD case you refer to involved Sony sneaking a root kit onto your system, which was sort of illegal (not that anyone ever saw any jailtime for it, mind you). It's an entirely different situation, though.

cwl7454

1st October 2010, 09:11

That is why I am surprised that another company/business hasn't tried it, or maybe they have. Anyways it's just a matter of time as everything now falls under preemptive security banner. Sorry, A little off topic but just couldn't resist.

Ghitulescu

1st October 2010, 09:22

For one, you can't really chose not to buy "Cinavia-infected movies," as you won't know upfront (unless you're willing to wait until someone else bought it and happens to mention it on doom9; which, of course, no regular customer will ever do, and likely a lot of folks on doom9 itself won't either).

The Audio CD case you refer to involved Sony sneaking a root kit onto your system, which was sort of illegal (not that anyone ever saw any jailtime for it, mind you). It's an entirely different situation, though.

No, I'm talking about some other protection before that, I don't recall its name now.

In Germany there was an initiative: someone created a public database for "uncds". After someone discovered that a CD didn't work in a car-stereo or the like it was listed and eventually people didn't buy them any longer. And the studios dropped that. And they tried the rootkit instead hoping it would go unobserved.

Yes, it needs that one or two or 100 or 1000 buy that cinavia BD, but when the info goes public, we may choose whether we buy it or not. If NOT then they won't sell 2 millions (and blame the damn pirates as usual) but 1, 2, 100, 1000.

Ajax_Undone

1st October 2010, 23:44

I see it a a violation of your freedoms under fair use having such a system that voids audio/video on a legal backup...

setarip_old

2nd October 2010, 00:44

@Ajax_Undone

Hi! (It's been quite a while ;>})

I see it a a violation of your freedoms under fair use having such a system that voids audio/video on a legal backup...
I'd think no more nor less than any other type of copy protection. Additionally, the definition of "legal backup" is anything but clear throughout the world...

setarip_old

2nd October 2010, 01:09

@Ghitulescu

Hi! it was listed and eventually people didn't buy them any longer. In the world of new release videos, historically, approximately 85% of sales are made during the first 40 to 45 days on the shelf - which is likely well before the majority of potential "non-tech" customers would become aware (if ever) of the existence of Cinavia protection on the disc - and WELL AFTER the breakeven point for the studio(s). Therefore, the negative impact on the studios bottom line (profitability) would be quite limited.

Additionally, as you can well imagine, the majority of purchasers have no knowledge or thoughts of making backups.

Different than the SONY-specific scenario you speak of, the effective cessation of purchasing (IF Cinavia proved to be successful) all new releases from all major studios would require worldwide consumer cooperation to an extent never before seen.

BTW - If the SONY CD scenario you speak of is the "Track 0" fiasco (Reputedly cost SONY $1,000,000 to develop), it was overcome within one week of release by a 25 cent black marking pen ;>}

rolypolyman

2nd October 2010, 16:13

Is there any possibility of having the capability to write or re-write ROM marks, through some black market hardware of some kind? That would fix the problem right there.

Ghitulescu

2nd October 2010, 16:38

It's clear, just different :)
[QUOTE=setarip_old;1447705]...
Right, but it would serve at least one aware people, me, ... ;)
Is there any possibility of having the capability to write or re-write ROM marks, through some black market hardware of some kind? That would fix the problem right there.
One cannot write ROMs ... by definition. The 2 choices are clear:
1. drop cinavia and any other watermarking system
2. find (bzw. rewrite the firmware of) gear that does not observe cibania and the like.

rolypolyman

2nd October 2010, 22:32

One cannot write ROMs ... by definition.

Well why does Wikipedia say this?
A specially licensed piece of hardware is required to insert the ROM-mark into the media during replication. Through licensing of the special hardware element, the BDA believes that it can eliminate the possibility of mass producing BD-ROMs without authorization

This suggest it's possible. What's to stop one of those Chinese electronics vendors from offering some sort of black market ROM writer? That would defeat Cinavia and probably undo a good chunk of DRM schemes to boot.

rotty

3rd October 2010, 00:28

Well why does Wikipedia say this?

This suggest it's possible. What's to stop one of those Chinese electronics vendors from offering some sort of black market ROM writer? That would defeat Cinavia and probably undo a good chunk of DRM schemes to boot.

You are assuming that Cinavia watermaked media only needs to be ROM to be classed as valid by the player.

In fact, it could require that the watermarked media needs to be:
(a) ROM
(b) encrypted
(c) still has BD+
(c) has BD live
(d) is full copy (i.e. not movie only)
(d) (and even possibly) sum check as original BD ROM. (although detailed data like this would be harder for the crude Cinavia modulation to embed)

Peer van Heuen

3rd October 2010, 07:34

You are assuming that Cinavia watermaked media only needs to be ROM to be classed as valid by the player.

In fact, it could require that the watermarked media needs to be:
(a) ROM
(b) encrypted
(c) still has BD+
(c) has BD live
(d) is full copy (i.e. not movie only)
(d) (and even possibly) sum check as original BD ROM. (although detailed data like this would be harder for the crude Cinavia modulation to embed)

I think, what he actually was implying was: being able to replicate the remaining sectors, including the mark, would allow true 100% 1:1 copies.

rolypolyman

3rd October 2010, 21:06

SamuriHL

3rd October 2010, 21:24

No, I think you misunderstand. They're talking about recreating the *FULL* protection on a backup. This is not possible. They were just discussing the possibility. Cinavia isn't some magic thing. :) It's an embedded signal. The type of signal that's embedded tells the *player* what to check for and what to do about it. So, for the typical retail BD, there's a signal that triggers an error message 3 if the player determines it's not an original disc. What they were discussing is making a backup that is indistinguishable from the original in terms of the protection. Again, that's not possible.

rotty

3rd October 2010, 21:45

Actually I did not consider the possibility of Cinavia looking for other pieces of the disc image... that does sound like a real can of worms. I certainly don't want to buy BD50's either. Thanks for educating me on this.

Hi rolypolyman

I’m not saying that Cinavia does look at the items I mentioned but could easily do so. If you were in charge of this system wouldn’t you do that, I know I would.

The suggestions re making a 1:1 copy is very dubious in thinking it would be indistinguishable from the original (even if you could fool the player into thinking the disk is a ROM and not a BD-R).
Also expensive and not an avenue to go down re this problem.

SamuriHL

3rd October 2010, 21:52

Hi rolypolyman

I’m not saying that Cinavia does look at the items I mentioned but could easily do so. If you were in charge of this system wouldn’t you do that, I know I would.

This is what I meant about attributing "magical" properties to "Cinavia". It is nothing more than an embedded signal. It doesn't look at anything. The *PLAYER* does. And yes, this makes a very big difference as it's more than just semantics. The player can already do a lot of checks. This can be combined with checking for the embedded Cinavia signal, yes, but, this is all done at the player level and is not some kind of "cinavia process."

The suggestions re making a 1:1 copy is very dubious in thinking it would be indistinguishable from the original (even if you could fool the player into thinking the disk is a ROM and not a BD-R).
Also expensive and not an avenue to go down re this problem.

That's right. It's not possible to create a 1:1 backup, and even if you could, you'd still have to convince the player it's not a write once or write many media. It's definitely not the way to tackle this problem. (Although it's hardly a problem yet considering there's only 2 discs out that contain the Cinavia signal).

rotty

3rd October 2010, 22:43

[QUOTE=SamuriHL;1448174]This is what I meant about attributing "magical" properties to "Cinavia". It is nothing more than an embedded signal. It doesn't look at anything. The *PLAYER* does. And yes, this makes a very big difference as it's more than just semantics. The player can already do a lot of checks. This can be combined with checking for the embedded Cinavia signal, yes, but, this is all done at the player level and is not some kind of "cinavia process."

I wasnt suggesting that Cinavia had magical properties, its purly a flag, it says "the media you are playing should be ROM based" and thats it.

But, once the player has been triggered in this manor, the check(s) it does can be anything the firmware has been set for.

Cinavia itself is a very low rate (few bits) modulated signal, existing anywhere in the audio track (except in any silent passage(s)), and repeated several times for confirmation purposes. Nothing magical about it and I certainly wasnt saying it was.

SamuriHL

3rd October 2010, 22:50

I was merely commenting on your statement that Cinavia could do some kind of checks, that's all. In other threads where Cinavia has been discussed, the speculation bordered on "magic". :) In any case, Cinavia isn't complicated. Any player that is capable, detects the embedded signal in the audio stream, and then checks to make sure the disc is an original. How the player determines that I don't think is actually known. It's been assumed that for retail BD's it checks for the presence of AACS. But afaik, no one really knows how it does those checks or whether that can be "tweaked" with firmware updates. I can imagine some really nasty things a player can do depending on how complex the checks are. But again, that's all player specific once it detects the Cinavia signal. And honestly, none of that is more than speculation.

rotty

3rd October 2010, 22:56

SamuriHL

3rd October 2010, 22:59

Cinavia does NO CHECKS at all, its a flag, its just a trigger and its up to the firmware on the player to do whatever checks the firmware is set for in the event of the flag being received.

Yes, that's what I'm saying, as well. Cinavia is an embedded signal that the player either detects....or doesn't. On or off.

These checks could be anything from just checking if the media is ROM to as many checks as you could imagine, up to whats in the updates.

That's what I'm speculating on. As to how complex the player can get with the checks after it detect Cinavia. As you said, it acts as a flag...detected or !detected. At a minimum I think the player needs to check for both ROM and AACS as that's required by the blu-ray spec.

setarip_old

7th October 2010, 19:41

SamuriHL

7th October 2010, 19:45

On the SlySoft forum it has been confirmed by several users that the message 3 error comes up on backups played on a PS3.

b66pak

7th October 2010, 19:50

after 20 minutes...
_

setarip_old

7th October 2010, 20:12

@b66pak

Hi! after 20 minutes...

Just to be clear, have you personally backed up a commercial Blu-ray of "Karate Kid"? If so, did you receive the same error message "3" mentioned by SamuriHL? Does the back of the packaging actually have "Protected by Cinavia" accompanied by a logo?

Thank you ;>}

rotty

7th October 2010, 21:28

@b66pak

Hi!

Just to be clear, have you personally backed up a commercial Blu-ray of "Karate Kid"? If so, did you receive the same error message "3" mentioned by SamuriHL? Does the back of the packaging actually have "Protected by Cinavia" accompanied by a logo?

Thank you ;>}

Because of the way Cinavia modulation works, it is possible that a disk without Cinavia watermark could trigger the Cinavia detetction.

If anybody reading this has a proven Cinavia enabled PS3, would be kind enough to play an older BD-R (NOT ROM), a disk known to be free of Cinavia embeded watermark, a disk with high ammount of movie music throughout the Movie, orchesteral music is best and see if you get any Cinavia message.

setarip_old

7th October 2010, 23:54

@rotty

Hi!

You've quoted my post to "b66pak"- so please explain what your post has to do with my post?

ron spencer

8th October 2010, 01:35

maybe a mistake setarip...does it really matter?

setarip_old

8th October 2010, 02:45

maybe a mistake setarip...does it really matter?Maybe "Yes" or maybe "No" - only "rotty" knows at the moment ;>}

Ghitulescu

8th October 2010, 08:14

Because of the way Cinavia modulation works, it is possible that a disk without Cinavia watermark could trigger the Cinavia detetction.

That was foreseen: this is why there is a repetitive watermark and this is why the trigger is activated only after a certain amount of time and [maybe false] positive detections. The detection is therefore quite precise.

rotty

8th October 2010, 09:17

That was foreseen: this is why the is a repetitive watermark and this is why the trigger is activated only after a certain amount of time and [maybe false] positive detections. The detection is therefore quite precise.

Yes this is true, however, once the threshold number of triggers have occoured within the designated time it will assume a watermaked disk.

A non embeded disk can do this with no watermark.

Ghitulescu

8th October 2010, 10:42

One of the causes of the relatively insignificant impact both DVD-Audio and SACD had was this watermarking. Both DVD-Audio and the SACD were directed to audiophiles, people that claim they can spot the differences between music at 192kHz and 96kHz and so on. Those people have spent incredible amounts of money on high end gear and expected high quality music. Either placebo or not, the watermarking annoyed them, so the sales dropped if ever launched :). This is logic in illogic ;)

So I came back to one of my posts and say we can stop it or at least delay it.

rotty

8th October 2010, 11:23

SamuriHL

8th October 2010, 15:47

It'll be a lot easier if they do in fact start putting the Cinavia logo on discs like they did for Karate Kid. :)

mike20021969

8th October 2010, 16:22

I am alone!
Thanks for your useful information!
Great Job!
I find your 3 posts, and signature link, suspicious.
(Very similar to SPAM appearing on SlySoft forum).
Or is it me?

One to watch maybe?: http://forum.doom9.org/member.php?u=188832

rotty

8th October 2010, 23:23

Now I know you shouldnt post an entry after a wine or two but "K Kid" protected with Cinavia, whatever for.

rotty

11th October 2010, 10:59

I dont know if there are any leagal issues, but what a great oppertunity for XBox to fit a Blu Ray drive to their games console and allow all formats (AVCHD etc) Cinavia free.

As I understand it, the games capability PS3 vs XBox is about parr so they could clean up.

Ghitulescu

12th October 2010, 10:24

So you want another trial for Microsoft? :) ;) :) ;)

rotty

12th October 2010, 20:06

So you want another trial for Microsoft? :) ;) :) ;)

LOL well he can afford it.

Nalios

14th October 2010, 23:20

It's been reported that on the back of the clamshell package, near the bottom, you'll see "Protected by Cinavia" accompanied by a logo.

Has anyone made a backup copy from an original, commercial "Karate Kid" Blu-ray and played it on a known affected firmware-updated PS3 (or one of the two or three other known affected standalone players).

If so, please describe what happened when you played the copy...
In response to your questions yes the clam shell has the Cinivia logo on it.. both the cardbaord sleeve and the back of the insert cover along with all the other trademark logos etc..

All my blu-rays are backed up to hard drive and I stream them to the PS3 to save wear and tear on the discs and the ps3 itself (especially after hearing reports of the laser failing in some.)

The Karate Kid does trigger the Cinavia message after aprox 20 minutes when streaming. Which was the first time I had heard of the *expletive* thing! It's what prompted me to come looking
here and Afterdawn for info. Had never even heard of it until the message popped up. Damn me for updating my firmware.

However for streaming to the ps3 there is a ridiculously simple work around. (Tested and confirmed with the Karate Kid at least.) I don't own the Losers so someone else would have to test it on that.

For a disc made for use with the ps3 it should work the exact same way. No idea if it's possible with a standalone as the ps3 allows for the workaround itself.

Inspector.Gadget

14th October 2010, 23:23

However for streaming to the ps3 there is a ridiculously simple work around.

You're going to say that and not post what the workaround is?

Nalios

14th October 2010, 23:26

Call me paranoid of a firmware update to fix it..

Jeremy Duncan

15th October 2010, 00:58

That's not fair. Tell us how you did it.

happycase

15th October 2010, 22:14

I'm no expert but can't you bitstream with the PS3 and not decode the audio internally?

Also, maybe someone can check, but are Karate Kid and Losers both multi-language discs? Has anyone determined in Cinavia is on a Chinese or Spanish track?

lithiumus

25th October 2010, 12:41

asarian

2nd November 2010, 12:35

What's this then?

Motherboard with onboard Cinavia? (http://www.asus.nl/product.aspx?P_ID=Gdf0vtpVf72LTYgs&templete=2)

What do I see under Specs -> Audio? "BD Audio Layer Content Protection." I hope that's not built-in Cinavia, otherwise I can kiss my new, prospective HTPC goodbye.

SamuriHL

2nd November 2010, 14:36

Most likely that's referring to Protected Audio Path, not Cinavia. Further to that, Cinavia *MUST* be done at the player level.

8ternity

3rd November 2010, 03:04

I've read over some bb that we can put back AACS keys back to the movie and burn it and cinavia protection detect that AACS is on the disc and not enable it. I wonder if anyone test it and if it's working or not, and with wich software that we can add back AACS to our backup disc?

SamuriHL

3rd November 2010, 03:10

Ghitulescu

3rd November 2010, 14:24

Maybe that guys own a replication factory :)

SamuriHL

3rd November 2010, 14:43

Maybe that guys own a replication factory :)

That'd be the only way. :) A BD-R/E can't have AACS burned to it as a writeable disc doesn't have the ability to hold the information needed to decrypt the content. So, the idea of writing a disc with AACS on it is silly. Unless, of course, you can commercially press them. :D

dirio49

3rd November 2010, 22:13

Well, not true.
We have the Japanese tv shows that have aacc.
and the vid is the disk id or something like that.

Peer van Heuen

4th November 2010, 07:19

Well, not true.
We have the Japanese tv shows that have aacc.
and the vid is the disk id or something like that.

Which is in fact an interesting thought...
If you can make a BDAV recorder record cinavia material to a BD-R, applying AACS, it would be interesting to see what the outcome is....

SamuriHL

4th November 2010, 13:57

Which is in fact an interesting thought...
If you can make a BDAV recorder record cinavia material to a BD-R, applying AACS, it would be interesting to see what the outcome is....

Uhhhhhh, HMMMMMM. I have to admit, that's not something I ever considered. That's rather interesting indeed!

rotty

4th November 2010, 22:45

Which is in fact an interesting thought...
If you can make a BDAV recorder record cinavia material to a BD-R, applying AACS, it would be interesting to see what the outcome is....

Im sure I dont need to say this but the problem is of course is that there would be nothing to stop an update that would check "Disk Type" i.e. check if its a ROM as opposed to BD-R/RE.

If that happened, then a burned disk with Cinavia emdedded could be classed as Non Valid.

Peer I know you wouldnt want to say too much but the feeling is that ALL the usual suspects (including Slysoft) arent sounding very optomistic re removal/disruption of Cinavia.

Thats not a complaint or knock its just the feel.

asarian

5th November 2010, 01:57

Im sure I dont need to say this but the problem is of course is that there would be nothing to stop an update that would check "Disk Type" i.e. check if its a ROM as opposed to BD-R/RE.

I believe it was Neuron2 himself who suggested maybe we really shouldn't talk in public about how to break it, if possible, and wait revealing stuff until the industry has committed itself far enough to have reached the point of no return.

Just sayin' I suddenly see the wisdom in those words now. :)

rotty

5th November 2010, 09:40

I believe it was Neuron2 himself who suggested maybe we really shouldn't talk in public about how to break it, if possible, and wait revealing stuff until the industry has committed itself far enough to have reached the point of no return.

Just sayin' I suddenly see the wisdom in those words now. :)

Hi Asarian

Yes I do of course understand that, its the general feel with this one that I was talking about, obviously, if there were a fix then we dont want it out there yet, or near future.

The feel I have is that everybody is talking in "Digital" terms with this marking. Of course, most experts in this field are digital.

A totally analogue understanding of Cinavia is required before a digital approach to remove/disrupt it is possible.

b66pak

13th November 2010, 17:16

it looks like its gaining speed...the last score is a very big title: Angelina's "SALT" (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0944835/)...
_

k-c-ksum

13th November 2010, 18:44

Resident Evil Afterlife is also cinavia marked. Sony releases trickling through, soon it will be a flood

b66pak

13th November 2010, 18:49

we are talking BD RETAIL ONLY here, so NO ts, r5, screeners or cam...
_

k-c-ksum

13th November 2010, 18:51

we are talking BD RETAIL ONLY here, so NO ts, r5, screeners or cam...
_

Res Evil afterlife 2 and 3d RETAIL cinavia marked

sporic

15th November 2010, 10:07

check this out:

http://ipb.quicksilverscreen.com/index.php?showtopic=224950

kypec

15th November 2010, 10:24

check this out:
http://ipb.quicksilverscreen.com/index.php?showtopic=224950
It's too easy to be true and besides, it's been posted in July already. I just can't believe that if this solution was effective it wouldn't be all over internet by now, sorry.

sporic

15th November 2010, 10:32

for goodness sake, I'm not asking you to take their word. try it out and see what happens would be a good idea.

derbeDeus

15th November 2010, 12:01

check this out:

http://ipb.quicksilverscreen.com/index.php?showtopic=224950

that's pure bs. it's been said thousands of times that it is so, simply because it cannot work. whoever understands what cinavia is will find any solution like that equivalent to voodoo.

kurkosdr

15th November 2010, 16:55

Just to sum it up, is there ANY way to get rid of Cinavia for a given file as of this date?

What if we mute the audio segments that have the cinavia watermark? A clumsy solution, but it's should do the job.

The best solution IMO is to find the noise pattern that gets embedded in the audio during the mastering stage. I mean, there's got to be a noise pattern. Either a pattern of analog ticks, or a pattern of analog hisses, or pink noise, or whatever.

Like rotty, I too believe that Cinavia is completely analog in nature, because it can survive recording from a microphone. I think that the glorious cinavia watermark is nothing more than a noise signal mixed to the audio track with a tool like Audacity. Nothing more.

If we can only find the pattern, then we can remove it, by doing the exact reverse procedure. So, it can be done.

setarip_old

16th November 2010, 00:08

@sporic

Hi!

You're repeating earlier postings to this thread (including mine). Click on the following link:

http://forum.doom9.org/showpost.php?p=1421456&postcount=109

setarip_old

18th November 2010, 04:42

Is this possibly a solution for updated PS3 users (at a price)?

http://news.softpedia.com/news/Firmware-Downgrades-Available-for-the-PlayStation-3-with-New-Jailbreak-Tech-166699.shtml

SamuriHL

18th November 2010, 04:52

Definitely a HUGE price to pay. But interesting nonetheless.

Klendathu

19th November 2010, 12:56

What we know:

Cinavia triggers after a certain time
Cinavia triggers in shorter intervals if you stop and resume, meaning the first trigger delay is software based.
Cinavia is not fooled by skipping around, meaning it must always be there
Cinavia cannot be removed by transcoding the audio to another format, meaning it is NOT a digital watermark
Cinavia does not require an active internet connection, meaning it is in the file.
Cinavia cannot be heard
Cinavia cannot be removed by removing some of the channels

Let's take a look at the soundfile then:

http://img204.imageshack.us/img204/5334/49809333.png (http://img204.imageshack.us/i/49809333.png/)

What you see is a five minute snapshot of a Cinavia movie I legally own. No copyprotection had to be circumvented in the creation of this picture. What you should notice is the stripe at 15khz. The intensity varies, but no matter what you do, it is always there. Zoom in closer and it'll appear where you thought it was not. Look at any part of the movie in this way and it will be there. A stripe means there is a concurrent sound of the same frequency from one frame to the next. This stripe is in the entire dts file from beginning to end on all channels except the lfc. This means that this is an artificial analogue signal. With everything else being digital, why should there be something like that? Because you would transcode it to ac3, mp3 or any other format. A watermark you copy, instead of stripping it away like you do with all the other digital watermarks. The one thing Cinavia does, what other watermarks don't. You cannot hear it, either because your hearing does no longer respond to 15khz, or if it still does, the sound is almost muted. But it is there, from beginning to end, if anything, this is what the software responds to. I took a look on some movies which are not Cinavia protected and none of them has any of those crazy 15khz stripes.

You know, if the shoe fits... ...this is Cinavia and it takes two clicks to strip. It is concurrent with some myths about how people supposedly stripped Cinavia by running weird filters. It is very easy to program a software to filter out such a signal, by comparison, looking for inaudible echoes is ghastly.

I am tempted to go out and buy more Cinavia protected movies to confirm this, but I trust one of you can either prove my theory or tear me a new one on how wrong I am.

Ghitulescu

19th November 2010, 13:56

mike20021969

19th November 2010, 15:41

What you should notice is the stripe at 15khz....I took a look on some movies which are not Cinavia protected and none of them has any of those crazy 15khz stripes.
I thought that even if the audio quality was reduced to that of a mobile phone or AM radio, Cinavia could still be detected?

SamuriHL

19th November 2010, 15:47

I thought that even if the audio quality was reduced to that of a mobile phone or AM radio, Cinavia could still be detected?

Yes, it can.

kurkosdr

19th November 2010, 18:46

You know, if the shoe fits... ...this is Cinavia and it takes two clicks to strip. It is concurrent with some myths about how people supposedly stripped Cinavia by running weird filters. It is very easy to program a software to filter out such a signal, by comparison, looking for inaudible echoes is ghastly.
Thanks for the bunch of info. You 've practically cracked Cinavia entirely by yourself. :)

If you can make such program, the entire internet will be patting you on the back.

This reminds me of an auto switch off technology marketed some years ago, where a TV would automatically switch off itself when you switched off the VCR. How they did it? The VCR simply inserted a special pulse at the vblank of the composite signal. The aforementioned TVs would look for said signal, pick it up, and proceed to switch off themselves. Ordinary TVs would just ignore such signal.

WSS and CGMS-A work in a similar way, and both need a device that's 'signal-aware' to work.

Yup, the idea behind Cinavia is that much old. Only that instead of being a pulse/bit sequense inserted in some blank area, it's a noise pattern inserted in the audio waveform. Obviously, this was done so the signal can survive conversion (either to analog or to other format).
But the basics are the same. The device looks for the pattern, picks it up, and proceeds to switch off/stop playback. This proves that, like many other copy protection schemes from Hollywood, cinavia is a pretty old idea held secret through obscurity and tight non-disclosure agreements.

Again, thanks for Klendathu for finding it out.

laserfan

19th November 2010, 18:55

I thought that even if the audio quality was reduced to that of a mobile phone or AM radio, Cinavia could still be detected?

Yes, it can.
Then there must be more to this or else a "simple" notch filter at 15kHz oughta remove it, right? I for one would not likely tell such an excision has been made from the original.

setarip_old

19th November 2010, 19:04

@kurkosdr

Hi!

As I posted both in my Post #1 with which I started this thread, and Post #14, the specific "Verance"/"Cinavia" technique appears to date back to at least 2001:

Post #1 It was first licensed to Universal Studios in 2003, for use with DVDs and VHS tapes - but likely never used

Post #14 If anyone with more technical knowledge than I have is interested, here's a link I came upon, to a "challenge" regarding audio watermarking, dating back to 2001:

http://www.usenix.org/publications/library/proceedings/sec01/craver.pdf

SamuriHL

19th November 2010, 19:37

Then there must be more to this or else a "simple" notch filter at 15kHz oughta remove it, right? I for one would not likely tell such an excision has been made from the original.

Let me put it this way. Someone pointed a camcorder at a wall with a Cinavia title playing in the background. The analog recording was then played back on their PS3 and the error 3 Cinavia message came up. :) I have just made an MP4 with stereo crappy AAC audio and the PS3 picks that up, as well.

mrr19121970

19th November 2010, 20:06

@Klendathu

I'd like to see more graphs like this on different audio codecs & line in too, if it's not too much trouble for you.

Thanks.

mike20021969

19th November 2010, 20:13

Anyway, I thought Cinavia is a waveform based protection.

jdobbs

19th November 2010, 20:34

Seems like a logical course would be to extract the audio from a non-cinavia DVD, extract audio from a Cinavia BD disc, and do a difference analysis. Anyone done that?

k-c-ksum

19th November 2010, 21:01

Seems like a logical course would be to extract the audio from a non-cinavia DVD, extract audio from a Cinavia BD disc, and do a difference analysis. Anyone done that?

yeah, extract the core audio and demux the audio into seperate channels, preferable 1 with not much going on and play it on the ps3 to see if its detects the cinavia, if it does then demux the same audio channel from the dvd and compare.

2011 the year cinavia become's a pain in the ass :(

SamuriHL

19th November 2010, 21:06

2011 the year cinavia become's a pain in the ass :(

Only if your player supports it. :)

Klendathu

19th November 2010, 22:09

I am reasonably sure that anything that survives the psycho-acoustic requantization of MP3 is rather low-tech in nature.

Especially when this technology is old and was supposed to be used in a VHS recorder. I can't imagine them putting an expensive DSP into such a machine. A 10 cent notch filter? More likely.

I am sure testing will reveal something. First make a short recording that triggers the PS3, then dissect it by cutting anything away in 1khz steps, so you have 15 files each with a different range of 1khz. See which ones trigger, see which ones don't. Rejoin those which do not trigger, see if they still do not trigger. Try the same with another movie. What's left then holds the key.

ChiDragon

20th November 2010, 00:39

I'm no audio wizard, so perhaps someone else will find these useful. 54 second samples, one with Cinavia and one without, both sourced from DTS-HD MA tracks. It's possible they are mixed slightly differently.

http://img13.imageshack.us/img13/3969/cinaviaflacs.png (http://chidragon.thedessie.com/CinaviaFLACs.zip)

setarip_old

20th November 2010, 03:19

Has anyone determined whether "Cinavia" MUST read ALL audiostreams and determine that they ALL contain the incriminating watermark before "doing its thing?

SamuriHL

20th November 2010, 03:35

Has anyone determined whether "Cinavia" MUST read ALL audiostreams and determine that they ALL contain the incriminating watermark before "doing its thing?

Well, I made a BD-RE of just the main DTS-HD MA track on The Losers and it detected it from that.

setarip_old

20th November 2010, 03:47

@SamuriHL

Hi! Well, I made a BD-RE of just the main DTS-HD MA track on The Losers and it detected it from that.If you're saying that the disc you made contained ONLY ONE audiostream then you misunderstand me. I'm wondering what might happen if one added an ADDITIONAL, perhaps blank, audiostream to a backup of a "CINAVIA"-infested Blu-ray - so that if it originally had 4 audiostreams, it would now have 5)...

SamuriHL

20th November 2010, 03:48

You're correct. I misunderstood. No, I didn't try that. I'm 99.9% sure it will have no affect at all. But someone should try it.

Peer van Heuen

20th November 2010, 08:02

I am reasonably sure that anything that survives the psycho-acoustic requantization of MP3 is rather low-tech in nature.

Well, the "predecessor" of this watermark, the one used on several DVDA discs, already was way more sophisticated than that. It was not a "signal added" to the audio on some frequency band, but more like a modification of existing information.
Its playfield was on certain frequency bands, yes, but a) were they slightly varying and b) removing the frequencies would have removed the very core of the audio.

Also, I'm not sure why people seem to be so convinced, that it's an "old" watermarking technology. Just because some papers that allegedly may be the basis of the tech were marked "2001" doesn't mean much. Even if the watermark is based on these, it doesn't mean it hasn't evolved. On top of that, I think I remember that at least one of them (referred to somewhere either here or on our forum) that was from 2008.

Anyway - our own findings so far indicate that it is definitely not as easy as cutting out some frequency and be done with it.

asarian

20th November 2010, 09:03

@SamuriHL

I'm wondering what might happen if one added an ADDITIONAL, perhaps blank, audiostream to a backup of a "CINAVIA"-infested Blu-ray - so that if it originally had 4 audiostreams, it would now have 5)...

Even if that would work, which I'm 99.9% sure it won't, Sony and co. would simply, and easily, fix that on the next firmware update.

Also, I have always had great respect for the SlySoft folks. Nonetheless I doubt Cinavia will ever be successfully removed; if for nothing else, because I don't want it removed, even. Which is to say, even if someone could very cleverly remove (or disrupt) the markers that trigger the Cinavia detection, the resulting HD audio would still have to be resampled -- at quality loss (for the same bitrate). Consequently, I think the simplest -- and probably best -- solution will be for someone to 'brick' their PS3 one day, and remove or disable the Cinavia detection itself at firmware level. Or we should go to simply building our own HTPC's.

Peer van Heuen

20th November 2010, 10:48

Consequently, I think the simplest -- and probably best -- solution will be for someone to 'brick' their PS3 one day, and remove or disable the Cinavia detection itself at firmware level. Or we should go to simply building our own HTPC's.

...chiming in on this - I think Cinavia will basically make non-conforming players more popular and HTPC solutions with a combination of on-the-fly protection removal and a simple player will be given a push.

SlyPlayer is already doing nicely and will be available soon... say February or so? ;)

k-c-ksum

20th November 2010, 11:44

Patching the firmware for your standalone might be posible? ps3 might be out. Are Firmwares for standalones alot less robust? is it possible to compare a pre cinavia player firmaware to an infecteds one.?

rotty

20th November 2010, 15:04

Has anyone determined whether "Cinavia" MUST read ALL audiostreams and determine that they ALL contain the incriminating watermark before "doing its thing?

Lets put it this way, a mono track, if marked, will also trigger Cinavia.

setarip_old

20th November 2010, 17:16

@rotty Lets put it this way, a mono track, if marked, will also trigger Cinavia.Let's put it this way, if an extra track is added that is NOT marked is what I'm discussing...

rotty

20th November 2010, 17:45

@rotty Let's put it this way, if an extra track is added that is NOT marked is what I'm discussing...

If you mean, if you’re watching the movie and listening to an unmarked secondary track then I don’t know, it would depend at what stage in the player the info is taken for the Cinavia detection circuit.

I take it you were interested in another track with same audio as the master track but without the watermark to see the difference, reckon they would have thought of that but you never know.

P.S.
I’m sure I remember reading before in a post that in the first appearance of Cinavia, people have muxed an audio track from a DVD (obviously same movie) onto their burned blu ray disk and that did not have Cinavia. So there are probably plenty of examples of duplicate tracks, one with and one without Cinavia for comparison. If you knew where the marks were I bet you would actually be able to hear the difference.

Butchering audio like this with Cinavia make a nonsense of having HD Master tracks.

Klendathu

20th November 2010, 23:11

Anyway - our own findings so far indicate that it is definitely not as easy as cutting out some frequency and be done with it.

No matter how much it butchers the audio, nothing but cutting frequencies can help locate it. I am not overly concerned with loss of audio quality, since finding the Cinavia is the more interesting problem. Once I do know exactly where it idles around, the question is to find out how it works and how rhythmic the signal needs to be.

If that doesn't help, I am sure there are interesting things to do with audio resolution. Sure, Cinavia can trigger at 16bit sampling rate, but will it still trigger at 8bit? at 4bit? What is the minimum resolution required for it to work? How can you mess up a 16bit signal so that the resolution is messed up in the right places? What happens if the signal runs through a stereo with DSP effects simulating different room sizes? I am confident, I will have fun for a while.

Beyond that I am not thinking about removing the watermark, but rather imprinting my own watermark on top of it. Slightly less inaudible maybe and 100% corrupting the underlying watermark. That is what you do with an analog signal, you do not remove it, you simply jam it. If layering a stronger signal on top of it still triggers Cinavia, then we still know where to weaken the sinal. Weakening an already inaudible signal? I can't imagine a lot of quality loss happening there.

rotty

21st November 2010, 01:17

No matter how much it butchers the audio, nothing but cutting frequencies can help locate it. I am not overly concerned with loss of audio quality, since finding the Cinavia is the more interesting problem. Once I do know exactly where it idles around, the question is to find out how it works and how rhythmic the signal needs to be.

If that doesn't help, I am sure there are interesting things to do with audio resolution. Sure, Cinavia can trigger at 16bit sampling rate, but will it still trigger at 8bit? at 4bit? What is the minimum resolution required for it to work? How can you mess up a 16bit signal so that the resolution is messed up in the right places? What happens if the signal runs through a stereo with DSP effects simulating different room sizes? I am confident, I will have fun for a while.

Beyond that I am not thinking about removing the watermark, but rather imprinting my own watermark on top of it. Slightly less inaudible maybe and 100% corrupting the underlying watermark. That is what you do with an analog signal, you do not remove it, you simply jam it. If layering a stronger signal on top of it still triggers Cinavia, then we still know where to weaken the sinal. Weakening an already inaudible signal? I can't imagine a lot of quality loss happening there.

The description of the Cinavia watermark as "inaudible" in this case does not mean you cannot hear it, means un-noticeable, it will be audible.

It does survive really bad recording with a microphone, and I do mean bad recording.

You mention a 15K signal present, a cheap microphone will not be able to detect those frequencies, put a 100N cap across an eletret mic and try recording the marked audio, it still survives, the cap will limit top end to about 4K.

Because we don’t know where in the time line these marks are we are not carefully listening out for it. Once these mark points are identified, we will be able to probably identify by ear where they are once when we get to hear what we are listening out for.

And yes your totally right, disrupting will be the best option. Removal will cause us to really notice where the marks used to be.

Dont be fooled by Cinavia being quickly detected thereafter the inititial detection. This does not mean the mark is continuous.

setarip_old

21st November 2010, 01:45

asarian

21st November 2010, 02:38

If, as I've read either at the Doom9 Forums or elsewhere, "Cinavia" must first ascertain that ALL audiostreams of a Blu-ray disc contain the watermarking (to avoid being sued for erroneously turning off a legitimated Blu-ray disc). If that is the case, perhaps it's as simple as adding (NOT replacing) 1, 2 or even 5 blank audiostreams...

That would be an incredible loophole! Therefore I can hardly believe it to be true. The logical thing would be to shut off playback the moment you detect Cinavia anywhere on the disc (and the stream it's in is not on a pressed Blu-Ray). Someone with a new firmware in his PS3 should try it out, though.

Also, wasn't Cinavia only present in HD audio? It seems to make little sense for SD audio, as people could then simply burn a BD-R with the audio track of a lowly DVD release.

asarian

21st November 2010, 03:04

Weakening an already inaudible signal? I can't imagine a lot of quality loss happening there.

Quality loss is always going to occur, even if you were able to remove Cinavia 100% accurately, without any collateral damage. And simply because you'd have to resample the resulting stream. Now, if the original were 16-bit, you'd be in luck, and you could upsample to 24-bit, and the loss would be extremely minimal (to absent, perhaps); but at the same bitrate, quality loss will ensue; that's a given. Perhaps you don't mind, but I consider a non-lossless fix (with loss of quality, that is) not a satisfactory permanent solution.

Also, how are you going to resample? Is, say, SlySoft going to incorporate a DTS-MA encoder? Likely not. So, a resampled stream will probably be LPCM. Which is fine when used for a custom software player; but if you want to reburn your Blu-Ray, that extra lengthy LPCM track may cause you to run out of disc space.

Because we don't know where in the time line these marks are we are not carefully listening out for it. Once these mark points are identified, we will be able to probably identify by ear where they are once when we get to hear what we are listening out for.

And yes your totally right, disrupting will be the best option. Removal will cause us to really notice where the marks used to be.

Dont be fooled by Cinavia being quickly detected thereafter the inititial detection. This does not mean the mark is continuous.

Not continuous, perhaps, but certainly continuously spread out over the entire stream.

Let's say a PS3 triggers at X times detection of the marker; then, typically, you would be inclined to disrupt at each, say, X-1 marker. But you can bet the distance between these markers is random (within a certain window, of course). And you can also bet that X itself is not a fixed number, either. So, in practice you'd probably have to dampen any and all markers you find.

rotty

21st November 2010, 12:37

Quality loss is always going to occur, even if you were able to remove Cinavia 100% accurately, without any collateral damage. And simply because you'd have to resample the resulting stream. Now, if the original were 16-bit, you'd be in luck, and you could upsample to 24-bit, and the loss would be extremely minimal (to absent, perhaps); but at the same bitrate, quality loss will ensue; that's a given. Perhaps you don't mind, but I consider a non-lossless fix (with loss of quality, that is) not a satisfactory permanent solution.

Also, how are you going to resample? Is, say, SlySoft going to incorporate a DTS-MA encoder? Likely not. So, a resampled stream will probably be LPCM. Which is fine when used for a custom software player; but if you want to reburn your Blu-Ray, that extra lengthy LPCM track may cause you to run out of disc space.

Not continuous, perhaps, but certainly continuously spread out over the entire stream.

Let's say a PS3 triggers at X times detection of the marker; then, typically, you would be inclined to disrupt at each, say, X-1 marker. But you can bet the distance between these markers is random (within a certain window, of course). And you can also bet that X itself is not a fixed number, either. So, in practice you'd probably have to dampen any and all markers you find.

Yes the mark will be repeated throughout. But not continuous and of course is not possible at all in silent passages.

I get the impression from Peer's comments that Slysoft is going down the s/w player route to circumvent the watermark rather that remove or dissrupt it.

We still have the ultimate weapon, dont buy watermarked disks, even if that means buying none for a while until it is removed.

asarian

21st November 2010, 13:40

Yes the mark will be repeated throughout. But not continuous and of course is not possible at all in silent passages.

Well, silent is rarely truly silent, of course (think static and/or background noise). Though, granted, embedding Cinavia in a 'silent' passage would be kinda pointless (I mean, from the perspective of the copyright holder, who cares whether I can listen to silence or not?), and it would make it easier for people to detect Cinavia.

I get the impression from Peer's comments that Slysoft is going down the s/w player route to circumvent the watermark rather that remove or disrupt it.

And I have to admit I didn't fully grasp that remark of his, in that software solutions, like XMBC, to play without Cinavia on a HTPC, already exist. But perhaps he has referring to alternatives to PowerDVD and ArcSoft TMT and such.

EDIT: Another way would be to come up with a way to hack into Windows' underlying Media Foundation structure and such, so as to manipulate audio streams at low-level. Then you could continue to use your regular playback software. Although I think that would probably only work for pure MS products, like Windows Media Player and Windows Media Center.

rotty

21st November 2010, 13:50

Well, silent is rarely truly silent, of course (think static and/or background noise). Though, granted, embedding Cinavia in a 'silent' passage would be kinda pointless (I mean, from the perspective of the copyright holder, who cares whether I can listen to silence or not?), and it would make it easier for people to detect Cinavia.

And I have to admit I didn't fully grasp that remark of his, in that software solutions, like XMBC, to play without Cinavia on a HTPC, already exist. But perhaps he has referring to alternatives to PowerDVD and ArcSoft TMT and such.

EDIT: Another way would be to come up with a way to hack into Windows' underlying Media Foundation structure and such, so as to manipulate audio streams at low-level. Then you could continue to use your regular playback software. Although I think that would probably only work for pure MS products, like Windows Media Player and Windows Media Center.

Cinavia needs to modulate existing audio and thats what I meant by not possible in silent or near silent passages.

Yes I think thats what Peer meant, an alternative to existing s/w players.

SamuriHL

21st November 2010, 15:37

EDIT: Another way would be to come up with a way to hack into Windows' underlying Media Foundation structure and such, so as to manipulate audio streams at low-level. Then you could continue to use your regular playback software. Although I think that would probably only work for pure MS products, like Windows Media Player and Windows Media Center.

That wouldn't work. The player controls the audio stream as it's read off the disc (or wherever it comes from if it's reauthored). Internally it's checking for the presense of Cinavia and if detected, it stops outputting the audio stream.

As for what Peer is saying, he very clearly stated that he believes the future of software playback is going to be SlyPlayer(tm). This is a full featured, *freeware* software player that SlySoft is developing. It'll play all your unprotected backups even if they contain Cinavia. It'll just ignore that part. Of course, there are many other solutions, as well. MPC-HC, VLC, XBMC, etc will all never support Cinavia so they can be used for playback. I personally backup all my BD's to MKV format and use MPC-HC to play them back with perfect bitstreaming. So, there are ways around the Cinavia problem that don't require any work or removal. SlyPlayer isn't out yet, and Peer alluded to the running joke that all new SlySoft products are released in "February". LOL! But it is in development.

jdobbs

21st November 2010, 16:10

That wouldn't work. The player controls the audio stream as it's read off the disc (or wherever it comes from if it's reauthored). Internally it's checking for the presense of Cinavia and if detected, it stops outputting the audio stream.

As for what Peer is saying, he very clearly stated that he believes the future of software playback is going to be SlyPlayer(tm). This is a full featured, *freeware* software player that SlySoft is developing. It'll play all your unprotected backups even if they contain Cinavia. It'll just ignore that part. Of course, there are many other solutions, as well. MPC-HC, VLC, XBMC, etc will all never support Cinavia so they can be used for playback. I personally backup all my BD's to MKV format and use MPC-HC to play them back with perfect bitstreaming. So, there are ways around the Cinavia problem that don't require any work or removal. SlyPlayer isn't out yet, and Peer alluded to the running joke that all new SlySoft products are released in "February". LOL! But it is in development. A new software player wouldn't do anything for people how use their SAP, though... which is by far the vast majority. The only real solution is removal. Firmware mods would also work -- but could become a fulltime job for somebody.

The bottom line is that if Cinavia can be added to an audio stream, it can also be removed. The hard part is finding what to remove.

On-the-fly audio analysis and removal could be a real headache for a driver-based anti-protection mechanism, though. It may be something more easily done after a complete rip. Ughhh... I'll leave all that up to the experts.

Sharc

21st November 2010, 16:22

SamuriHL

21st November 2010, 16:42

A new software player wouldn't do anything for people how use their SAP, though... which is by far the vast majority. The only real solution is removal. Firmware mods would also work -- but could become a fulltime job for somebody.

The bottom line is that if Cinavia can be added to an audio stream, it can also be removed. The hard part is finding what to remove.

On-the-fly audio analysis and removal could be a real headache for a driver-based anti-protection mechanism, though. It may be something more easily done after a complete rip. Ughhh... I'll leave all that up to the experts.

Right, I agree that removal is definitely the end goal. However, I don't think it's going to prove all that simple to just remove it. It's going to take time. For now we need to come up with a solution that works today. For those with standalones, there really isn't one unfortunately.

rotty

21st November 2010, 16:56

How about
1. Convert (recode) a Cinavia protected audio from the HD stream (DTS or whatever) to ac3 / 448
2. Compare with the corresponding extracted audio of a SD (DVD) ac3 / 448 original

e.g. synchronize the 2 streams in time, subtract 2 from 1 and analyze the difference ....

A man after my own heart.

The best way to do this is to convert the Cinavia infested track(s) to mono (this make everything much simpler)
It doesent really matter at what quality, just a reasonable quality.

Do the same for the non infested audio track(s)

As you said, it is of course important for them to be totally synced. And I mean really in sync, we are looking at part cycle differences using a differential op amp.

The two tracks do have to be exactly the same (apart from Cinavia of course)

Connect say the Cinavia track into the + input of the amp, use an LM380 for ease.
Connect the non Cinavia track into the - input.

You must have potentiometers on both inputs.

Turn completely down pot 2, adjust pot 1 so the sound output is a good listsening level.
Now adjust pot 2 up slowly, if your tracks are in sync, then as you increase pot 2 the output should become lower and lower.

As I say, if the tracks are the same and in sync, you should get to the point when you hear nothing or very very little out of the amp. Turnng the pot higher from this point you will start to hear the output again.
Adjust pot 2 for the lowest output you can get

You will only hear an output if there is a difference in the inputs, either a difference in amplitude, phase or of course if the info is not the same at any point.

Sit back and listen out for the differences.
Cinavia will be heard.

P.S. forgot to say, re mux the two mono tracks, (the one with and the one without Cinavia) into a single stereo track.
Listsneing (not from the op amp) to the sound using your normal player using your normal audio system, if in sync the sound should appear in center of field and solid, no spread. If it sounds like that then you have the tracks in phase and synced up and can continue with the test.

Put say left output into the + input of the op amp and right channel into the - input of the op amp.
and set up as before the P.S.

asarian

22nd November 2010, 02:30

A man after my own heart.

The best way to do this is to convert the Cinavia infested track(s) to mono (this make everything much simpler)
It doesent really matter at what quality, just a reasonable quality.

Do the same for the non infested audio track(s)

As you said, it is of course important for them to be totally synced. And I mean really in sync, we are looking at part cycle differences using a differential op amp.

The two tracks do have to be exactly the same (apart from Cinavia of course)

Connect say the Cinavia track into the + input of the amp, use an LM380 for ease.
Connect the non Cinavia track into the - input.

You must have potentiometers on both inputs.

Turn completely down pot 2, adjust pot 1 so the sound output is a good listsening level.
Now adjust pot 2 up slowly, if your tracks are in sync, then as you increase pot 2 the output should become lower and lower.

As I say, if the tracks are the same and in sync, you should get to the point when you hear nothing or very very little out of the amp. Turnng the pot higher from this point you will start to hear the output again.
Adjust pot 2 for the lowest output you can get

You will only hear an output if there is a difference in the inputs, either a difference in amplitude, phase or of course if the info is not the same at any point.

Sit back and listen out for the differences.
Cinavia will be heard.

While laudible, I fear such attempts are if not futile, then doomed to fail. Even if you could 'diff' the Cinavia superimposing with exact certitude, then it's by no means certain you will have extracted useful markers. For all we know, Cinavia adds a lot of extra, random noise, just to throw us off track.

My point being, the only truly successful way, IMHO, will be to reverse-engineer the firmware of a standalone player, and watch it, step-by-step, to see what actual markers are being used -- instead of just the entire diffed signature. Only that will give us a real insight as to what needs to be removed/dampened.

Peer van Heuen

22nd November 2010, 08:34

And I have to admit I didn't fully grasp that remark of his, in that software solutions, like XMBC, to play without Cinavia on a HTPC, already exist. But perhaps he has referring to alternatives to PowerDVD and ArcSoft TMT and such.

I was not saying, that new players are needed, I merely pointed out that alternative players will gain popularity - those existing and those to come...

That said - I haven't seen any alternative BD player that got me too excited, yet. Most have drawbacks, a choice from no GPU acceleration, unreliability, not supporting all streams, not all audio codecs, only play individual .m2ts files.
Usability issues on top of all that.

Some, like XMBC, are quite advanced and a good choice for an HTPC, but you can't just shove in a blu-ray disc and watch it.

Anyway - certainly, we are working on removing Cinavia. So, no, we're definitely not "going down the s/w player route to circumvent the watermark", we also didn't launch the SlyPlayer project because of Cinavia.

I'm just saying, that with Cinavia being added to more and more discs, buyers will have more incentive to not touch hardware players, but instead go for an HTPC with such an alternative player. It's simply less trouble.

Not that it really needs much more of that: I was on a trip to Europe recently, had a bunch of my DVDs along and was so used to not worrying about region codes, that I forgot, that these discs were going to be utterly useless on a region 2 DVD player in the hotel room... :rolleyes:
That's part of the "collateral damage" you buy into, when using certified devices.

My discs. Bought. Paid for. Can't watch them. Screwed.
I felt - apart from feeling a little stupid, as I really didn't think of that beforehand - abused.

xenex

22nd November 2010, 09:06

@Peer

You should have brought along a laptop with AnyDVD installed.

Seriously, though, until there is some sort of 'consumer outrage' most people are just going to believe "that's just the way it is." Heck, I expected an outcry when DVDs started using the Macrovision APS to stop VHS recording. Nope. I expected complaints when DVDs abused PUOs to force watching previews, etc. Nope. I really thought the hue and cry would begin with HDCP requirements. Nope.

The average 'consumer' writes "INSERT HERE" on a Post-It note (copyright 3M), pulls down his pants, bends over, attaches the note to his posterior, and smiles.

Such is the state of the world.

rotty

22nd November 2010, 10:55

While laudible, I fear such attempts are if not futile, then doomed to fail. Even if you could 'diff' the Cinavia superimposing with exact certitude, then it's by no means certain you will have extracted useful markers. For all we know, Cinavia adds a lot of extra, random noise, just to throw us off track.

My point being, the only truly successful way, IMHO, will be to reverse-engineer the firmware of a standalone player, and watch it, step-by-step, to see what actual markers are being used -- instead of just the entire diffed signature. Only that will give us a real insight as to what needs to be removed/dampened.

Hi Asarian
Whatever Cinavia adds to the track, it will be heard using the op amp, every part of the audio that is the same as the original will produce silence or next to no output from the amp if wired as I stated in last post.

Added noise or whatever is added will NOT be on the original non Cinavia track, therefore difference between the two tracks and only differnces will be output from the LM380N and therefore you will hear them.

Certainly not futile.

As I say, sit back and listen, mostly you will hear nothing, but every time Cinavia has altered the track you will hear it, no matter what Cinavia has added.

Ghitulescu

22nd November 2010, 11:28

The best way to do this is to convert the Cinavia infested track(s) to mono (this make everything much simpler)
It doesent really matter at what quality, just a reasonable quality.

Do the same for the non infested audio track(s)

As you said, it is of course important for them to be totally synced. And I mean really in sync, we are looking at part cycle differences using a differential op amp.

The two tracks do have to be exactly the same (apart from Cinavia of course)

Connect say the Cinavia track into the + input of the amp, use an LM380 for ease.
Connect the non Cinavia track into the - input.

You must have potentiometers on both inputs.

Turn completely down pot 2, adjust pot 1 so the sound output is a good listsening level.
Now adjust pot 2 up slowly, if your tracks are in sync, then as you increase pot 2 the output should become lower and lower.

As I say, if the tracks are the same and in sync, you should get to the point when you hear nothing or very very little out of the amp. Turnng the pot higher from this point you will start to hear the output again.
Adjust pot 2 for the lowest output you can get

You will only hear an output if there is a difference in the inputs, either a difference in amplitude, phase or of course if the info is not the same at any point.

Sit back and listen out for the differences.
Cinavia will be heard.

Nice testing procedure, however ..... :)

The existence of a comparable non-cinavied audio defeats the purpose of implementing Cinavia in the first place, because everyone would use this one and not the cinavied one :)

So I have to assume that either all editions would be cinavied or bar none. I'm referring here to the corresponding track only (it makes no sense to compare the EN track with the DE or FR or ES one) and to US, RU, AU, JP etc. editions.

rotty

22nd November 2010, 12:03

Nice testing procedure, however ..... :)

The existence of a comparable non-cinavied audio defeats the purpose of implementing Cinavia in the first place, because everyone would use this one and not the cinavied one :)

So I have to assume that either all editions would be cinavied or bar none. I'm referring here to the corresponding track only (it makes no sense to compare the EN track with the DE or FR or ES one) and to US, RU, AU, JP etc. editions.

Hi Ghitulescu

I have read in some previous posts that someone had remuxed track from non Cinavia DVD to BD to replace the Cinavia track on the blu ray. If an NTSC DVD then prob no re syncing required.

I think that there are examples of duplicate tracks out there for comparison, espcially from the early days of Cinavia.
I hope so.

all the best fella.

Ghitulescu

22nd November 2010, 13:03

Hi Ghitulescu

I have read in some previous posts that someone had remuxed track from non Cinavia DVD to BD to replace the Cinavia track on the blu ray. If an NTSC DVD then prob no re syncing required.

I think that there are examples of duplicate tracks out there for comparison, espcially from the early days of Cinavia.
I hope so.

all the best fella.

My point was that cinavia is applied to HD lossless audio and no other source has this audio.

asarian

22nd November 2010, 13:05

Added noise or whatever is added will NOT be on the original non Cinavia track, therefore difference between the two tracks and only differnces will be output from the LM380N and therefore you will hear them.

Certainly not futile.

As I say, sit back and listen, mostly you will hear nothing, but every time Cinavia has altered the track you will hear it, no matter what Cinavia has added.

Agreed. I merely meant to say, that 'diffing' two signals, for the purpose of finding the Cinavia markers, is likely fail (because of the random noise they may have added and such).

As for purely hearing the difference, sure, your method would work. I'm just not entirely certain on what merely hearing the Cinavia signal would accomplish towards making an algorithm to remove the scheme.

rotty

22nd November 2010, 13:32

Agreed. I merely meant to say, that 'diffing' two signals, for the purpose of finding the Cinavia markers, is likely fail (because of the random noise they may have added and such).

As for purely hearing the difference, sure, your method would work. I'm just not entirely certain on what merely hearing the Cinavia signal would accomplish towards making an algorithm to remove the scheme.

Hi Asarian

To fight this we need to know what it actually is, this will tell us. At the moment we are fighting an invisible enemy.
If we do this we wont be.

mike20021969

22nd November 2010, 14:10

SlySoft are obviously working on, and confident of removing, Cinavia.

More 'tips' from Joe Bloggs on what to do about removing it...surely are no longer relevent?
It seems to just be going round in cirlcles now after 18 pages.

SamuriHL

22nd November 2010, 14:39

I was not saying, that new players are needed, I merely pointed out that alternative players will gain popularity - those existing and those to come...

That said - I haven't seen any alternative BD player that got me too excited, yet. Most have drawbacks, a choice from no GPU acceleration, unreliability, not supporting all streams, not all audio codecs, only play individual .m2ts files.
Usability issues on top of all that.

Some, like XMBC, are quite advanced and a good choice for an HTPC, but you can't just shove in a blu-ray disc and watch it.

Anyway - certainly, we are working on removing Cinavia. So, no, we're definitely not "going down the s/w player route to circumvent the watermark", we also didn't launch the SlyPlayer project because of Cinavia.

I'm just saying, that with Cinavia being added to more and more discs, buyers will have more incentive to not touch hardware players, but instead go for an HTPC with such an alternative player. It's simply less trouble.

Not that it really needs much more of that: I was on a trip to Europe recently, had a bunch of my DVDs along and was so used to not worrying about region codes, that I forgot, that these discs were going to be utterly useless on a region 2 DVD player in the hotel room... :rolleyes:
That's part of the "collateral damage" you buy into, when using certified devices.

My discs. Bought. Paid for. Can't watch them. Screwed.
I felt - apart from feeling a little stupid, as I really didn't think of that beforehand - abused.

This would be why I can't wait for SlyPlayer. I know it wasn't created for Cinavia, but, in the end it will provide a nice solution to the problem. Removing Cinavia is a good end goal, but, it's going to take a fair bit of work. In the meantime, it behooves us that use HTPC's to make sure we always have a player that doesn't have Cinavia detection. This, of course, doesn't help the standalone people. For them, they have no choice but to wait for Cinavia to be removed. However, those of us that use HTPC's use them for the very reason that we have options. That's now proving to be a really good thing.

(And I'm shocked! You didn't bring your backups instead?? :D)

Peer van Heuen

22nd November 2010, 14:58

It seems to just be going round in cirlcles now after 18 pages.

The going round in circles is basically because the ideas coming up here are the very obvious ones that the engineers of the watermark came up with first.
It is understandable, of course, but the architects of Cinavia are signal processing specialists, and you really need a little background in order to be able to get into their minds.

Things just aren't as simple as many think they are.

Hi Asarian
Whatever Cinavia adds to the track, it will be heard using the op amp, every part of the audio that is the same as the original will produce silence or next to no output from the amp if wired as I stated in last post.

Added noise or whatever is added will NOT be on the original non Cinavia track, therefore difference between the two tracks and only differnces will be output from the LM380N and therefore you will hear them.

Certainly not futile.

As I say, sit back and listen, mostly you will hear nothing, but every time Cinavia has altered the track you will hear it, no matter what Cinavia has added.

As for purely hearing the difference, sure, your method would work. I'm just not entirely certain on what merely hearing the Cinavia signal would accomplish towards making an algorithm to remove the scheme.

Absolutely. Actually, you won't even neccessarily "hear" even part of the watermark at all.
I dare anyone with some time on their hands to conduct the following experiment to prove how easy it is to make the "difference approach" totally useless (I did it a while ago out of curiosity):

Take any simple mono sound sample, feed it chunkwise into an FFT, phase shift the frequencies, then iFFT. You can even use different phase values per frequency band, without causing the sample any audible damage.
The difference of the input and output sample will more or less sound like a somewhat distorted version of the input signal.

Any "signal" that would have been planted will be just as hidden in this difference signal as it was in the original sound.

Now, you can try and re-align the phases, but they could also be slowly varying over time (slowly in these scales means within fractions of seconds).

And this is only one possible way to obfuscate a watermark signal.

(And I'm shocked! You didn't bring your backups instead?? :D)

Believe it or not - I hardly ever copy a disc at all.
I just use AnyDVD to watch discs in a dignified manner, without all the bending over.... :)

SamuriHL

22nd November 2010, 15:19

Believe it or not - I hardly ever copy a disc at all.
I just use AnyDVD to watch discs in a dignified manner, without all the bending over.... :)

So....you use AnyDVD as how it was originally intended. How depressing! ROFLMAO! :D I can understand. I use it that way a lot, as well. Clearly for rented discs I only ever watch them but always with AnyDVD enabled. Yet another reason I want a player with no Cinavia support. Once the commercial software players add Cinavia, playing discs with Cinavia and AnyDVD enabled will no longer work. :(

rotty

22nd November 2010, 18:03

[QUOTE=Peer van Heuen;1459474]

Hi Peer

You are of course right, if the phase of the marked track is slowly leading then lagging and worse, the speed at which it does it is random then a diffential would always be present. And as you say, a very slow change in phase would not be detected by us and therefore not destroy the our perceived quality.

In my defence, I did say to test the created stereo (from the Cinavia and non Cinavia mono tracks) by listening to the normal audio system and that it should sound central, solid and no spread at all. A changing phase in one of the tracks as you know would give a continuously changing positional shift in the stereo field and no point in continuing with the test.

Now this is just out of interest:
I dont know if you can answer this safely, but have you heard a watermaked portion of audio and the same portion without mark.

And I am very pleased (as im sure all of us are) that you are endevouring to remove this as well as creating the new player.
Look forward to both.

Thank you Peer.

kurkosdr

22nd November 2010, 23:54

My point being, the only truly successful way, IMHO, will be to reverse-engineer the firmware of a standalone player, and watch it, step-by-step, to see what actual markers are being used
Yes, but how are we going to get the firmware out of the chip it's stored in inside the standalone? Have Conan the Barbarian squeeze the chip really hard till the firmware leaks out? Sure, you can try to get it from some firmware update disc, but there is a high chance it will be obfuscated, i don't think they will have left their firmware unprotected like that.
Unless of course hollywood makes a mistake and cinavia trickles down to some software player like PowerDVD/WinDVD//TMT3. Then it's hex editor time and we ll solve our problem for good. So basically we are counting on them making a mistake (allow the firmware to leak somehow). But i agree with you that reverse engineering a player is the only 100% sure way to reverse engineer cinavia. Difference analysis requires guesswork, which will fail if the watermarking method is too complicated, inserts random noise, or is dependent on the original signal in a weird way.
So, I think too we must have our eyes peeled for a reverse-engineer-able firmware, but what do we do till then?

Here is a crazy idea to solve the problem right now:
Let's assume you have that very precious bluray you must absolutely backup.
Now, how about buying the DVD release, copying the AC-3 or DTS audio track and put it under the video stream of 1080p mkv you just ripped? As another member said, if it's a NTSC DVD, it can be done. Syncing shouldn't be that hard if you have two identical video tracks (only the resolution differs). It can even be done on a frame by frame basis. Sure, you ll lose the lossless audio, but you can't always have it all. Till now, it's the only solution that works everywhere.

The other solution is to use i standalone mkv player (the ones without a dvd/bluray drive, just a usb port), but most of them read only FAT32, so your mkv's are limited to 4.35gb even if you have a 16gb thumbdrive.

P.S.: Has anyone tried a cinavia marked mkv with PowerDVD? Does PowerDVD show any cinavia messages?
P.S.: Has anyone actually tried to use the 15KHz notch filter and tried to play the resulting file on a cinavia aware player?

Please answer these questions, as to make sure we are not cutting out two easy solutions without actually trying them

Sharc

23rd November 2010, 00:03

SamuriHL

23rd November 2010, 01:20

I've tested all the commercial players for Cinavia. *So far* none have it. But you can expect them all to get it eventually.

asarian

23rd November 2010, 02:25

I've tested all the commercial players for Cinavia. *So far* none have it. But you can expect them all to get it eventually.

Well, they can't have their cookie and eat it. If indeed, as kurkosdr pointed out, they make the mistake of putting it into PowerDVD, TMT, etc., then the Cinavia detection algorithm is up for grabs by anyone who can handle a debugger. So, the choice is theirs: either leave it out of software players -- allowing us to build HTPC's without Cinavia (for which we don't even need the commercial software, of course) -- or put it in, and watch their precious Cinavia be cracked. :)

The only manner in which I can envision us to be really screwed, is when Cinavia becomes integrated in audio chipsets on the motherboard (like the popular Integrated Realtek ac97 audio chipset). As to whether that will ever really happen remains to be seen. Intel's plans to integrate DRM into their CPU's, for instance, has never materialized either.

SamuriHL

23rd November 2010, 02:36

I'm sure there's ways to make it difficult to defeat Cinavia by debugging a commercial player. TMT, for example, won't even run with a debugger open. So there's a lot of protection and obfuscation to get through. Could someone determined enough break through it? Probably. Eventually. Then people would have the algorithm needed to detect Cinavia. Then, HOPEFULLY, a way to break that detection can be found. So, even with Cinavia implemented in software players, it still won't be a cakewalk. Doable, most likely, by the best and brightest. But not easy.

ChiDragon

23rd November 2010, 04:03

Now this is just out of interest:
I dont know if you can answer this safely, but have you heard a watermaked portion of audio and the same portion without mark.

I posted FLACs on page 16 and everyone ignored it...shrug.

asarian

23rd November 2010, 04:21

I posted FLACs on page 16 and everyone ignored it...shrug.

Guessing here; but I reckon because maybe people realize that, of course, you really don't have an FLAC of the same track without Cinavia (for the simple reason that if you did, Cinavia would already have been broken). What you do have, instead, is a completely different track (though to the ear it may sound similar, or the same even), which just so happens to be also DTS-MA.

Klendathu

23rd November 2010, 07:43

I posted FLACs on page 16 and everyone ignored it...shrug.

You did not use a spectral frequency display. There is not a lot to say about your standard waveform display of entire tracks. Sorry, but those screens are useless.

jdobbs

23rd November 2010, 14:34

With all sophisticated signal processing one can imagine: The watermark must be darn robust as it seems to survive re-encoding into different formats, re-compression (non-linear), poor quality microphones etc. Of course on the other hand all of those CODECs etc are designed to reproduce the original signal without noticable differences...Yes, but how are we going to get the firmware out of the chip it's stored in inside the standalone? Have Conan the Barbarian squeeze the chip really hard till the firmware leaks out? People do this every day... firmware patches that make slight mods are all over the internet, and it isn't really that hard if you know the chipset -- the problem is volume, who wants to spend all their time reverse engineering and patching hundreds of them?

Krawhitham

23rd November 2010, 21:37

You did not use a spectral frequency display. There is not a lot to say about your standard waveform display of entire tracks. Sorry, but those screens are useless.

He posted the audio files not just pictures. If you click one of the images it allows you to download the audio files

xenex

24th November 2010, 09:33

So, I downloaded the FLAC files posted by ChiDragon earlier. Very useful, I think. I loaded both into Audacity and only kept the left channel of the Cinavia and Non-Cinavia files.

With the two files "linked," ran Audacity's ->Analyze->Beat Finder (with default value 65) and came up with this:

http://stashbox.org/1034089/cin.png

That sure does look like a series of tiny "echoes" there between around the 32 and 41 second marks. I also tried with other channels, and found similar results, but in different places.

This is really easy to do, I'd appreciate if someone else gives this a try as well, just to verify this result.

EDIT - Here is a "Zoom In" on the right channel. This REALLY shows the echoes:

http://stashbox.org/1034097/cin2.png

Ghitulescu

24th November 2010, 10:20

One cannot remove cinavia, it's embedded in the sound.

The results would be similar to any de-logo or de-subtitler plug-in for video. Except that the sight and the hear work somehow different and probably an extremely narrow notch-filter would lead to "passable" artifacts. I also think that cinavia won't be implemented into AC-3 tracks on the same BD, only in the lossless ones, as it won't survive well the compression and might trigger false alarms.

rotty

24th November 2010, 10:40

asarian

24th November 2010, 11:02

Hi Xenex
Nice one, that would confirm what a lot of us thought in the first place, short term echo's. Very interesting.

Even poor audio recoding will still be able to reproduce this, as would even microphone recording. Very robust.

So, now all we need is some good oldfashioned echo-cancellation software. :)

rotty

24th November 2010, 11:35

So, now all we need is some good oldfashioned echo-cancellation software. :)

hi Asarian

LOL, Well of course, at best our comments are pure speculation, could be barking up the wrong tree. Doesn’t really matter our thoughts are just for interest and to bounce ideas off each other, and just curiosity, we are not the boys doing the fix.

Hopefully the people doing the work know the inner workings of this for sure.

Ghitulescu

24th November 2010, 11:48

xenex

24th November 2010, 11:58

One cannot remove cinavia, it's embedded in the sound.

Nobody said that one cannot remove cinavia.

Ghitulescu, which one is it? Perhaps you should decide one way or another before your next post.

asarian

24th November 2010, 12:00

Generic/blind echo cancellation would bring nothing but sensible alterations of the source.

Hence the smiley behind my comment. :) It's still interesting to see Peer was apparently on the right track with his ideas (now why doesn't that surprise me?). As to whether Cinavia can be removed, so as to keep the HD quality, I'm still not a huge believer in that; but 'From the minds that gave us AnyDVDHD' is good for a lot of credit over here.

Indeed, you can bet data is being embedded as well to instruct the player. Which might be an Achilles heel, if you could manipulate said data in telling the decoder that this track has the lowest 'alarm' setting (or none at all). Hmm...

At any rate, we'll just see what the big boys come up with.

Ghitulescu

24th November 2010, 13:29

Ghitulescu, which one is it? Perhaps you should decide one way or another before your next post.

One cannot remove cinavia without degrading the quality. That's the whole idea (which is by way not new, it dates back in the 60ies, when the analog recorders hit the market).

It can be removed/inactivated, but with quality issues and the sound won't be HD-lossless-like quality, or it can't be removed, if HD-lossless-like quality is to be maintained.

Read the posts in their context.

PS: I'm not a purist, however I dislike to get "distorted" A/V items, even more when they are marketed as "listen XYZ in the studio-master-quality" but you know this is not true. Because this is not copy protection, it's putting into circulation of fakes, and therefore it should be outlawed.

EDIT
Here is a recaptioned video frame from Alien (the original frame had embedded subtitles).
http://joeclark.org/appearances/AEA/2007/AEAimages/160Alien.jpg
Were the old subtitles removed or not?
I could answer YES, because they are no longer visible, I could also say NO, because should they have been removed in the first place, there were no longer need for a black frame on top of which the new subtitles were written. Both answers are correct, depending on how the things are considered (what is more important). Sorry for the bad image, it's all what I could find in this short time.

rotty

24th November 2010, 16:54

One cannot remove cinavia without degrading the quality. That's the whole idea (which is by way not new, it dates back in the 60ies, when the analog recorders hit the market).

It can be removed/inactivated, but with quality issues and the sound won't be HD-lossless-like quality, or it can't be removed, if HD-lossless-like quality is to be maintained.

Read the posts in their context.

PS: I'm not a purist, however I dislike to get "distorted" A/V items, even more when they are marketed as "listen XYZ in the studio-master-quality" but you know this is not true. Because this is not copy protection, it's putting into circulation of fakes, and therefore it should be outlawed.

EDIT
Here is a recaptioned video frame from Alien (the original frame had embedded subtitles).
http://joeclark.org/appearances/AEA/2007/AEAimages/160Alien.jpg
Were the old subtitles removed or not?
I could answer YES, because they are no longer visible, I could also say NO, because should they have been removed in the first place, there were no longer need for a black frame on top of which the new subtitles were written. Both answers are correct, depending on how the things are considered (what is more important). Sorry for the bad image, it's all what I could find in this short time.

Hi Ghitulescu

I have to disagree with you on this one.

Its worth remembering that Watermarking is not the same as subtitling.

Firstly, the subtitle is designed to be seen, and seen well at that. Certainly NOT transparent to the viewer, quite the opposite.

A watermark is designed to to be stealthy and un-obtrusive to the viewer/listener

Putting aside Audio watermarking for a second, lets take Video watermarking. As you already know, video watermarking is embedded on CCTV to stop frames being removed/tampered with for evidential reasons. These frames have a few pixels per frame altered according to an algorithm.

They are for the most part unseen by the viewer and can be easily destroyed and removed/blended. The result is totally unseen and the video frames look fine and un-damaged.

Not the same as subtitling.

Ghitulescu

24th November 2010, 17:44

rotty

24th November 2010, 17:53

The point was the removal of a watermark. I had to use an image here, not a sound.
I couldn't find a better image, and a personal one would take some weeks to be approved. I was looking for a de-logo image, actually.

Yes, indeed, the watermarking is supposed to be transparent, but is not.
The idea was how to remove it, and the answer to anyone that has read the cinavia patents, is that it cannot be done without damaging the audio (it might be noticeable or not, but this is not the point, the point is that the AC-3/DTS track might be of a better quality than the lossless one). It was not designed to be removed, au contraire, it was designed to be detected only by a device not by a human, and in the same time difficult to remove.

Hi Ghitulescu

I find myself un-usually poles apart from you on this one.

Removing Oliver Hardy from a picture of Laurel and Hardy would not be seamless but removing/changing a few pixels which is the watermark would be.

Same with audio, removing the piano from a syphany would be very noticable, removing sounds. that were not niticed before would not be noticed.

Im not saying that Cinavia marking is simple to remove, just that the comparison of a subtitle/logo being the same problem as a watermark in this case is completley wrong.

spotter

24th November 2010, 21:17

Nobody said that one cannot remove cinavia.

Generic/blind echo cancellation would bring nothing but sensible alterations of the source. Verance patents encompass a large palette of permutations that includes: 2 or more carriers (one has been identified, 15kHz, but it could change), variable phase-shift, delays, offsets and data-embedding (which may tell the host which algorithm to use for triggering "positive alarm")....

Since the cinavied signal must be "invisible" to the ears, so its inventors, it cannot be placed inside the audible spectrum, any lossy and aggressive (low bitrates) algorithm would remove it, or at least its simpler implementations.

Anyway, either the playback would stop or one will end with a low quality copy of the audio. Win:win situation.

If it's placed in inaudible spectrum area, then one should be able to make a relatively perfect copy of the uncompress PCM stream (or whatever its called) with a simple filter to filter out those frequencies. If it's inaudible for other reasons (i.e. in an audible area, but mixed in for a way that's inaudible) that's a different story.

rotty

24th November 2010, 22:16

If it's placed in inaudible spectrum area, then one should be able to make a relatively perfect copy of the uncompress PCM stream (or whatever its called) with a simple filter to filter out those frequencies. If it's inaudible for other reasons (i.e. in an audible area, but mixed in for a way that's inaudible) that's a different story.

Yes I would agree. I beleive its well within the audible spectrum. Its just un-noticable, it wouldnt be able to survive a bad microphone recording otherwise.

There could of course be more than one signal type, audible and outside our spectrum, either of which if received are valid.

whurlston

25th November 2010, 01:54

(one has been identified, 15kHz, but it could change) I wouldn't be so sure of that. If you look at ChiDragon's non-Cinavia sample, you will see that it has the same 15kHz characteristics.

Ghitulescu

25th November 2010, 09:11

rotty

25th November 2010, 10:37

Some people hear 15kHz some not. The easiest way of checking this for yourself is to have an old CRT TV and listen carefully if you hear the buzzing of the line transformer (which is driven at 15625 Hz).
Some people pretend to hear the FM stereo signal (19kHz), too.

And there's a net separation between what is claimed (theory) and what is technically and economically possible. This is why cinavia will be implemented in lossless audio only. It is not feasible for the manufacturers to produce gear that would not yield false positives because of the inability of cinavia to withstand some compression schemes 100% reliable. Such a device would not sell.

Hi Ghitulescu

Do we know if the 15k pilot is Cinavia for sure.

I can hear the 15.625 Khz from a LopT still but this is not resolved by a poor mic, and we know that mic recording of Cinavia is retained. Also, kids would be driven mad by this on a good sound system.

If this pilot is Cinavia then this suggests that there are at least two systems involved, one possibly using echo effects that would survive microphone/poor quality recordings and the 15k approach that can instantly be detected for digital to digital recording and non notched line recording.

What is strange though is that if there are two systems then why have the pilot at 15k on HD tracks, why not higher.

Adding a 15khz signal is not good for keeping sound fidelity, in fact it is far too close to normal hearing range and will give strange intermodulation effects with sounds well within the range.

Even the 19K pilot for analogue stereo FM can cause problems even though its totally notched, although, because further removed from normal spectrum is less troublesome.

In this day and age of demands for perfect audio, what’s the point in having an HD audio track that is being compromised by a 15k tone.

The reason that HD audio extends well above normal human range is because sounds we cannot hear do interact with sounds we can hear, and by keeping these sounds (even though we cant hear them) is to reproduce the effects we hear in the real world.

Tampering with that, well we may as well have average quality MP3.

Ghitulescu

25th November 2010, 11:08

Hi Ghitulescu

Do we know if the 15k pilot is Cinavia for sure.

I can hear the 15.625 Khz from a LopT still but this is not resolved by a poor mic, and we know that mic recording of Cinavia is retained. Also, kids would be driven mad by this on a good sound system.

Adding a 15khz signal is not good for keeping sound fidelity, in fact it is far too close to normal hearing range and will give strange intermodulation effects with sounds well within the range.

Even the 19K pilot for analogue stereo FM can cause problems even though its totally notched, although, because further removed from normal spectrum is less troublesome.

In this day and age of demands for perfect audio, what’s the point in having an HD audio track that is being compromised by a 15k tone.

The reason that HD audio extends well above normal human range is because sounds we cannot hear do interact with sounds we can hear, and by keeping these sounds (even though we cant hear them) is to reproduce the effects we hear in the real world.

Tampering with that, well we may as well have average quality MP3.

Exactly my point - with cinavia or "decinavied", the lossless track is doomed, that's exactly why the Philips system (and later the CDS one) failed for CD-DA, and SACD and DVD-A are stillborn.

rotty

25th November 2010, 11:17

Exactly my point - with cinavia or "decinavied", the lossless track is doomed, that's exactly why the Philips system (and later the CDS one) failed for CD-DA, and SACD and DVD-A are stillborn.

Hi Ghitulescu

And there lies its Achilles heel, in fact worse, its self inflicted destruction.

asarian

25th November 2010, 13:08

Hi Ghitulescu

Do we know if the 15k pilot is Cinavia for sure.

Good question. Although I'm by no means an audio expert, I must say I still highly doubt Cinavia is so frequency-range bound.

Embedding a signal in a certain (narrow) frequency range makes it primarily 'vertically' present, to put it that way; whereas a subtle echo, or other type of shift, possibly across the entire spectrum, makes it 'horizontally' applied. The latter is much, much harder to remove (if you don't know exactly what to look for), and would explain why Cinavia has been so incredibly resillient against re-encodes (even those of very poor quality): because compressing to MP3, or some such, typically sacrifices areas of the frequency spectrum believed to be inaudible, but hardly mangles the 'horizontal' flow of things, so to speak.

Besides, as has been pointed out, putting it at 15Khz would be odd, as I could still hear my TV at that frequency until I was way in my twenties. It's simply too close to what we can normally hear.

Ghitulescu

25th November 2010, 13:43

Verance patents encompass a large palette of permutations that includes: 2 or more carriers (one has been identified, 15kHz, but it could change), variable phase-shift, delays, offsets and data-embedding (which may tell the host which algorithm to use for triggering "positive alarm")....

Embedding a signal in a certain (narrow) frequency range makes it primarily 'vertically' present, to put it that way; whereas a subtle echo, or other type of shift, possibly across the entire spectrum, makes it 'horizontally' applied. The latter is much, much harder to remove (if you don't know exactly what to look for), and would explain why Cinavia has been so incredibly resillient against re-encodes (even those of very poor quality): because compressing to MP3, or some such, typically sacrifices areas of the frequency spectrum believed to be inaudible, but hardly mangles the 'horizontal' flow of things, so to speak.

That's in the patent too :)
Identifying such patterns also needs computing power, so in the end the CPU would spend more time in decrypting keys and copy protections than in decoding the HD video (properly or not) ;)

asarian

25th November 2010, 14:38

That's in the patent too :)
Identifying such patterns also needs computing power, so in the end the CPU would spend more time in decrypting keys and copy protections than in decoding the HD video (properly or not) ;)

So, the 15Khz is in the patent? Gotta say, that only adds to my annoyance about the whole thing. :(

Ghitulescu

25th November 2010, 15:12

No, phase shifting and stuff.
And there are several patents, not only one.

setarip_old

25th November 2010, 17:27

@Ghitulescu

Hi!

Your posts to this thread would be far more meaningful if you provide a link each time you make/made reference to specific portions of specific patents...

Krawhitham

25th November 2010, 18:57

@Ghitulescu

Hi!

Your posts to this thread would be far more meaningful if you provide a link each time you make/made reference to specific portions of specific patents...

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showpost.php?p=19396029&postcount=65

setarip_old

25th November 2010, 19:05

@Krawhitham

Hi!

Certainly, when making a post about a SPECIFIC passage of a SPECIFIC patent, a poster can, as I asked, provide a DIRECT link to that SPECIFIC passage...

coolalibaba

29th November 2010, 03:02

Hi I'm not very familiar with video/audio rip/processing. Can we confirm that when an audio is ripped/extracted from the BD, it contains all the original data? I ask this question because I saw someone posted this in other forum:

The way Cinavia is working is they are embedding a high and a low frequency into the dvd and blu rays now the problem isnt trying to remove these frequencies from ripped materials it is adding them. i have pulled the audio apart from a bluray disc and a copy i made of the bluray the actual purchased bluray has the frequencies in the files, the ripped version of it does not no matter if it was a exact copy. the high and low frequency goes on for the entire film meaning any breaks in it is when you get your error code 3 from cinavia.... now this is a very good system to have for the media now the downfall is every new bluray that i rip to my server can no longer stream to my ps3. I actually need to put the stupid disc in. (I am Lazy... What can i say) this is going to be on all the new bluray players and the firmware updates. Now the xbox 360 (for now) does not have this issue. It will stream everything still but that will probably change here soon. The only way i am THINKING to get around this is a new version of ripping software that will not throw these frequencies away when compressing the information. Its crappy i know and i am
feeling it also.. but i have found a use for my xbox 360 for now.... thank you microsoft.

SamuriHL

29th November 2010, 03:05

Hi I'm not very familiar with video/audio rip/processing. Can we confirm that when an audio is ripped/extracted from the BD, it contains all the original data? I ask this question because I saw someone posted this in other forum:

Sounds like complete nonsense to me. The only thing that happens in a lot of my copies is the AACS encryption is removed. Nothing more, nothing less. The streams aren't altered in any other way.

Ghitulescu

30th November 2010, 16:50

Hi I'm not very familiar with video/audio rip/processing. Can we confirm that when an audio is ripped/extracted from the BD, it contains all the original data? I ask this question because I saw someone posted this in other forum:

Cinavia is like a stain of paint on your T-shirt. When you undress yourself (ie rip the BD), you'll get all the original "data" (ie the T-shirt with the coloured spot), because cinavia is part of the original. It was designed to be so. Someone from the Amazonian rainforest or from Papua-New Guinea can't discern the difference between this stain and the "Polk High" (:)) logo, because he can't read, for him it's all alike, coloured spots on something white (he knows no T-shirts either).

How to remove the stain without removing "Polk High" in the same time, that's the problem.

RugRat

3rd December 2010, 21:00

asarian

3rd December 2010, 23:03

Cinavia, ok been playing around with this problem, here are my findings.
Salt DC, Stream form pc to Ps3 NO CINAVIA.
M2ts. On a memory stick NO CINAVIA.
AVCHD disk 20 chapters CINAVIA
AVCHD disk 1 chapter CINAVIA
Since it’s the same m2ts that plays on the memory stick and not a disk, could it be that the chapters have to be the same as the original
If someone can tell me how many chapters are on Salt DC blue-ray disk, or the losers blue-ray disk, I will try my theory out
That's a pretty big memory stick then, as the SALT m2ts file is a good 15 Gig (Director's Cut; playlist 0003).

Also, have you tried streaming the m2ts file? If your theory about chapters is right (which I find pretty incredulous), then streaming just the single (re-assembled) m2ts file should not trigger Cinavia either. I highly doubt it, though.

EDIT: Playlist 0003.mpls has 16 Chapters

SamuriHL

3rd December 2010, 23:06

So then how do you explain my PS3 detecting Cinavia on a memory stick with an MP4 with stereo AAC made from The Losers blu-ray? I didn't add any chapters at all.

wswartzendruber

4th December 2010, 07:49

Pardon me for skimming this thread so fast, but I took the center channel from those two FLACs and...

1. Cut about a millisecond of time from the Cinavia one to compensate for a slight delay.
2. Inverted the phase of the non-Cinavia one.
3. Played them mixed together.

The above procedure produces some very odd phasing results...almost as if I applied Audacity's Phaser effect, except I didn't. Is this normal?

RugRat

4th December 2010, 20:35

Can’t explain that, but it does not show up with a m2ts file with ac3 and it dose stream ok with ps3 media server, If you stream it but copy it to the ps3 which makes a mpg2 file and then copy and burn it to a disk cinavia dose not show up ether

SamuriHL

4th December 2010, 20:39

That's pretty interesting. Maybe a bug in the PS3's Cinavia detection routine?

asarian

4th December 2010, 20:45

That's pretty interesting. Maybe a bug in the PS3's Cinavia detection routine?

Wait... I think he's using an existing AC3 track from the Blu-Ray, which will likely not have Cinavia in it to begin with (as it's not HD audio). Which is, of course, not the same as down-sampling an existing HD track (with Cinavia in it) to a custom-rolled AC3 track.

SamuriHL

4th December 2010, 20:47

Wait... I think he's using an existing AC3 track from the Blu-Ray, which will likely not have Cinavia in it to begin with (as it's not HD audio). Which is, of course, not the same as down-sampling an existing HD track (with Cinavia in it) to a custom-rolled AC3 track.

Oh, yea, could be. Would be nice if it was clarified that the tracks were the original HD audio or not....even if re-encoded. In my case, they were.

RugRat

4th December 2010, 21:13

It is the original hd audio, streams with no problem, but when i put it on to disk i get cinavia,

SamuriHL

4th December 2010, 21:14

Thanks for the clarification. That's definitely interesting for sure.

RugRat

4th December 2010, 21:31

I thought it might be the chapters i.e. so many chapters have to have passed or a chapter has to start exactly where cinavia is

SamuriHL

4th December 2010, 21:35

Can't be. Cause my MP4 has no chapters and Cinavia's detected. So, I would guess a bug in the PS3 implementation.

RugRat

4th December 2010, 21:41

Ok it was just an idea

SamuriHL

4th December 2010, 21:42

Not a bad one, just that it doesn't fully explain the situation. I honestly don't have any real idea what's going on there. I'm also guessing. :)

RugRat

4th December 2010, 21:45

no time just now, will play around with it on monday and let you know what i find.

lithiumus

6th December 2010, 18:51

It is the original hd audio, streams with no problem, but when i put it on to disk i get cinavia,

Wait a minute... are you streaming the full HD audio or just the core AC3 track?

wswartzendruber

6th December 2010, 19:00

We know this system is proven against DCT-based algorithms and cheap microphones. Has anyone tried a wavelet-based compression system to see if it stands up against that?

setarip_old

9th December 2010, 23:16

@wswartzendruber

Hi! Has anyone tried a wavelet-based compression system to see if it stands up against that?Is that something YOU can do?

Eza17

13th December 2010, 14:36

Hi, I noticed this thread and had a good read through after I had been caught out by this protection myself. I'm am certainly no expert at this but thought I would post some experiments I have carried out and some 'work-arounds'. All my experiments were carried out using a PS3.

1. Re-encode and speed up by 10%. My assumption here was that a 10% increase would not be too noticeable which actually it isn't - FAIL. The cinavia protection still kicked in.
2. Re-encode and slow down by 10%. Just thought I'd test the other way on and see if that worked - FAIL. The cinavia protection still kicked in.
3. Split the movie into 15 minute sections. I figured if the protection kicks in at 'around' 20 mins then watching 15 min chunks could bypass it - FAIL. The protection kicked in 5 mins into the second section.
4. Re-encode and slow down by 50% (bear with this one) - SUCCESS. This does bypass the cinavia protection but obviously 50% is noticeable. I tried this after someone reported that playing a movie at 1.5x speed got round the protection so I thought slow it down so it sounds ok when speeded up. Unfortunately this doesn't work so the watermark does appear to be based on a repeating pattern within a certain time.
5. A fix that worked for me on the PS3 is to tweak the sound settings in the following way: Go to settings > Sound Settings, select the optical option and place a tick against every possible output type. Set the option relating to sound from multiple sources to 'On'. For some reason, with these sound options set, the Cinavia watermark isn't picked up? I haven't got a clue why this is but perhaps someone else does.
6. Another workaround on a PS3 is as follows: Play the movie till the protection pops up, quit the movie and change the time back 1 hour. Resume playback and protection kicks in straight away, quit movie and change time back to current time. When you resume playback now you get another 20 mins.

I ran some other tests to determine in what time frame the watermark is stored. Basically I re-encoded several 1 minute movies with a repeating section of sound cut from a cinavia watermarked movie. I used a repeating section ranging from 1 second to 12 seconds, played a watermarked movie till cinavia kicked in after the usual 20ish minutes and then tried playing the series of 1 minute movies. Cinavia didn't kick in on the 1 or 2 second repeated sections, it did kick in on the 3 second repeated section after 25-35 seconds. On all the other sections from 4 to 12 it kicked in within 6-15 seconds. I can only assume from this that the cinavia watermark is completely held within 4 seconds. Hopefully this info will help anyone who knows more about audio files to figure out how it works.

p.s. I also tried turning an audio stream backwards, this makes no difference and Cinavia protection still kicks in.

mike20021969

13th December 2010, 17:08

I also tried turning an audio stream backwards, this makes no difference and Cinavia protection still kicks in.Maybe this indicates the inaudible watermark pattern is the same forwards as it is backwards.

Eza17

14th December 2010, 16:58

I think it indicates that it's a vertical pulse of some kind (don't know if that's a propper description for a sound file!) and this 'pulse' needs to be repeated 'x' times in a given time frame.

Another interesting point from my experiments was that when I split the movie into 15 minute sections, the first section took consistently longer to mute the sound than the other sections (after repeated tests once the initial 20min 'grace period' had been used). The first section has a silent start, proving that although the watermark is 'inaudible', it still needs some sound to be present.

I might try and find a 'relatively' inactive area in the movie with not much sound or a single continuous sound and try an opposite approach than normal, find the simplest sound file which still contains the watermark.

b66pak

14th December 2010, 19:52

5. A fix that worked for me on the PS3 is to tweak the sound settings in the following way: Go to settings > Sound Settings, select the optical option and place a tick against every possible output type. Set the option relating to sound from multiple sources to 'On'. For some reason, with these sound options set, the Cinavia watermark isn't picked up? I haven't got a clue why this is but perhaps someone else does.

this is not working for me!

my ps3 is pal slim 250gb retail hdd fw 3.41...

tested with h264 + aac stereo in mp4 from internal end external hdd...

what type of audio did you use? (codec, nr of channels, container, transcoded or original, what movie)? did you played from internal, external, disk, network? your ps3 config?
_

Eza17

15th December 2010, 10:03

this is not working for me!

my ps3 is pal slim 250gb retail hdd fw 3.41...

tested with h264 + aac stereo in mp4 from internal end external hdd...

what type of audio did you use? (codec, nr of channels, container, transcoded or original, what movie)? did you played from internal, external, disk, network? your ps3 config?
_

Hi, sorry I'll have to check all the details and post them later for you but the things I do know are:

Movie: Resident Evil Afterlife
PS3: Slim 120gb & Fat 80gb, both on firmware 3.55
Played from: External disk, connected by USB
Audio is through HDMI cable.

I'll check the other things later and post them.

Eza17

16th December 2010, 11:14

Hi, the audio details are as follows:

Audio
ID : 2
Format : AAC
Format/Info : Advanced Audio Codec
Format version : Version 4
Format profile : LC
Format settings, SBR : No
Codec ID : 40
Duration : 1h 36mn
Bit rate mode : Variable
Bit rate : 502 Kbps
Maximum bit rate : 516 Kbps
Channel(s) : 6 channels
Channel positions : Front: L C R, Rear: L R, LFE
Sampling rate : 48.0 KHz
Resolution : 16 bits
Stream size : 348 MiB (16%)
Title : Resident Evil Afterlife
Language : English

b66pak

17th December 2010, 00:30

thanks a lot for the tip...now is working!
_

Sharktooth

17th December 2010, 02:52

can anyone try to encode to AAC-HEv2 with SBR and PS and see if the cinavia still kicks in?

b66pak

17th December 2010, 04:06

ps3 dont have support for this...
_

Mug Funky

17th December 2010, 04:27

ChiDragon's samples are different mixes.

there's time delays between different elements in the mix, also the dynamics are different (clearly visible on the final fadeout).

we need more samples like this though! it's useful.

the speed and/or phase seem to vary - i got clear comb-filter flanging patterns on the subtracted output, and the phase seemed to vary. it's hard to tell whether this is the mix or not.

one thing that seems possible - the cinavia version seemed to have some of its transients "doubled up", and some things appeared moved in time relative to each other, rather like a time-stretch based on time-domain splicing would do.

my 2 cents about the approach to take - we need to dissect the blu-ray authoring and mastering workflow to find out at what point it is introduced. my bet is on the encoder side, but it's possible there's a VST plugin and it happens in the sound-mix. we should search for products and white-papers or processes offered by the companies making these discs.

ChiDragon

17th December 2010, 10:54

The theatrical mark, at least, is added in mixing: http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=19401075#post19401075

b66pak

20th December 2010, 19:58

two new BDs join the party: "Takers (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1135084/)" and "The Social Network (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1285016/)"...
_

setarip_old

20th December 2010, 21:36

According to DVDFab Passkey, "The Other Guys" Blu-ray, a SONY release, contains Cinavia protection...

(I wonder what Passkey reads in order to determine that?)

SamuriHL

20th December 2010, 21:40

According to DVDFab Passkey, "The Other Guys" Blu-ray, a SONY release, contains Cinavia protection...

(I wonder what Passkey reads in order to determine that?)

A database from what I understand. I forget where I saw it discussed, but, I don't believe it's scanning the disc for Cinavia if that's the implication you were making. I believe they're using a database of known Cinavia titles. But again, I can't quote a source on that.

k-c-ksum

20th December 2010, 22:47

Sony releases have the cinavia logo on the case cover.

SamuriHL

20th December 2010, 22:51

Sony releases have the cinavia logo on the case cover.

Sure, but, DVDFab PassKey isn't looking at the cover to know that. :D Maybe that's how they're creating an internal database of titles so that when you insert one it knows.

fengtao

21st December 2010, 16:58

Dear all,

Yes, our interest on Cinavia firstly led to building of this page (http://forum.dvdfab.com/showthread.php?p=46933#post46933). Then we thought to add the information to our database so the DVDFab and Passkey can use it to notify our users of Cinavia watermaked discs.

The page and our database are updated all the time to the best of our knowledge; our sources of information range from user feedback on our forum and various av forums to the testing with actual discs, of course these have different level of trust, so we think that so far our information is very much correct.

For instance, we've noticed that, for current Cinavia discs, only the English track was watermarked.

As for how it works, we do scan the discs for certain identification elements then compare to our db. Anyway, we're working on an automatic detector.

Best Regards,
Fengtao

SamuriHL

21st December 2010, 17:01

Thanks for the clarification, Fengtao!

fengtao

21st December 2010, 17:39

You are welcome :)

setarip_old

21st December 2010, 17:50

@fengtao

Thank you for answering my question about Passkey ;>}

Ghitulescu

21st December 2010, 17:55

Yes, our interest on Cinavia firstly led to building of this page (http://forum.dvdfab.com/showthread.php?p=46933#post46933). Then we thought to add the information to our database so the DVDFab and Passkey can use it to notify our users of Cinavia watermaked discs.

Just wondering, as many people around have and use multimedia players, would it be possible to add those, too? While most of them if not all do not have cinavia on-board, a sales representative said they will slip cinavia in with a new firmware if required, without noticing the users (because of NDA agreements).

xenex

22nd December 2010, 09:21

Just wondering, as many people around have and use multimedia players, would it be possible to add those, too? While most of them if not all do not have cinavia on-board, a sales representative said they will slip cinavia in with a new firmware if required, without noticing the users (because of NDA agreements).

It's been said before, but unless said multimedia player manufacturer(s) include an actual Blu-Ray drive and are legally bound to include Cinavia detection (by AACS license), why would they do it?

It would cost them more in hardware costs, it would anger their customers, and would of course lead to poorer sales. Seems like a bad business decision all around.

Ghitulescu

22nd December 2010, 10:46

It's been said before, but unless said multimedia player manufacturer(s) include an actual Blu-Ray drive and are legally bound to include Cinavia detection (by AACS license), why would they do it?

It would cost them more in hardware costs, it would anger their customers, and would of course lead to poorer sales. Seems like a bad business decision all around.

Why do the BD player manufacturers include cinavia, then? It would also lead to angry people, poor sales.... As I said before, cinavia would be silently slipped in, and before the info spread out, many users would be "infected".

The reason is that in order to play BD files, one needs licences for codecs and logos and stuff, and these come with these requirements, or legal suit threatenings. That's even more dangerous to their business, it would mean OUT.

xenex

22nd December 2010, 11:07

Read what I said.

Why do the BD player manufacturers include cinavia, then? It would also lead to angry people, poor sales.... As I said before, cinavia would be silently slipped in, and before the info spread out, many users would be "infected".

Blu-Ray-Player-Hersteller sind gesetzlich verpflichtet, den AACS-Lizenz folgen. So müssen sie beinhalten Cinavia Erkennung, wie es jetzt ist Bestandteil der Lizenz.

Blu-Ray player manufacturers are legally bound to follow the AACS license. Thus, they must include Cinavia detection, as it is now part of the license.

It was stated earlier in this thread.

Media players which do not include a Blu-Ray drive, and are not signers of that AACS license have no need to add Cinavia detection. And I guarantee they won't. Do you really think media player manufacturers are going to increase their hardware costs and anger their customers - despite no legal obligation - because they just love Hollywood and its DRM measures?

It's not a big "Cinavia" conspiracy. You just have to think about it from a business/profit-making perspective.

Ghitulescu

22nd December 2010, 13:32

As I said before: don't forget the other licences. Imagine everyone would buy/use AnyDVD/dvdfab/etc. to copy BDs and play them unrestricted on "free" gear, even worse, send the files through internet and anyone can watch them for free. To quote you: "think it from profit-making perspective" why let this happen? The solution was invented 20 years ago, all devices must obey some rules (at the time called SCMS, CPRM etc.).

And cinavia is nothing else than the confirmation that other protections failed. So, control the gear.

GodofaGap

23rd December 2010, 09:17

On the other hand, if those Media Player manufacturers do give in to these kind of schemes they practically commit suicide, because they exist by the grace that people can copy (or pirate) media.

Ghitulescu

23rd December 2010, 09:56

Not necessarily, otherwise they won't be allowed by the law to sell these things, there are plenty of legal sources, like camcorder files, or videos from cellphones, cameras etc. Then there are the old backups, when the law allowed them. And last but not least, online videos, like youtube (it's also illegal to download videos or to use them outside their player) and so on.

I said long time ago, there's a limit of acceptance for piracy, because "piracy" is what drives the sales. A non-copyable (and/or proprietary and/or closed) format would eventually die.

GodofaGap

23rd December 2010, 10:14

Not necessarily, otherwise they won't be allowed by the law to sell these things, there are plenty of legal sources, like camcorder files, or videos from cellphones, cameras etc. Then there are the old backups, when the law allowed them. And last but not least, online videos, like youtube (it's also illegal to download videos or to use them outside their player) and so on.
The problem of the things you mention is that you don't have to look very hard to get all those things working on a regular Blu-Ray player right now anyway. And I think you overestimate the importance of homemade files in this.

The only advantage these Media Players have is that they play "anything", and if they stop doing that, they're dead.

Ghitulescu

23rd December 2010, 10:34

The question is not whether they'll have or not some/less/more customers, but whether the manufacturers comply or not with the requirements of the law. Remember that Betamax (and then VHS) went into mass production only after a trial, won by Sony against MPAA, I hope I'm not mistaken, I'm not Ami. However, Sony avoided the next trial by just implementing SCMS in their DAT recorders. Now Sony is on the other (wrong ;)) side of the barricade, and you see the trend, I think ;)

GodofaGap

23rd December 2010, 11:04

The question is not whether they'll have or not some/less/more customers, but whether the manufacturers comply or not with the requirements of the law.
If the Cinavia requirement is a part of the AACS license then for now there is nothing to worry about as they are not bound to it. The only way manufacturers can get into trouble is if Cinavia is some general requirement put on all audio related devices, and things haven't gotten so far yet.

xenex

23rd December 2010, 11:20

Thanks, GodofaGap

It's what I have been TRYING to tell Ghitulescu. There is no "law" - anywhere - requiring Cinavia. The ONLY devices that require Cinavia detection are Blu-Ray players that are assignees to the AACS license agreement.

And they are legally bound to include it - not by law - but by contractual agreement that they were required to sign and agree to by the terms of the AACS license in order to make licensed Blu-Ray players.

The various media-players which do not include Blu-Ray drives, but only play media, MP3, VC1, AC3,, etc are NOT BOUND to include Cinavia detection. The AACS license requires it, the codecs are free to use.

Ghitulescu

23rd December 2010, 11:35

There's no law requiring SCMS either. There's no law requiring AACS at all.

It's all licensing. If one chooses not to licence (and to obey its requirements) it would be brought to justice, at it provides ways of stealing content protected by intellectual property (accessory to crime).

The codecs are not always free to use. All MPEG codecs are property of MPEG-LA, except for MP3 which half belongs to Frauenhofer, VC-1 is the property of Microsoft, AC-3 of Dolby labs, DTS of DTS and so on. That one can use them more or less free, doesn't imply that they are freeware. of course, it also depends whether the country one resides allows or not software patenting.

xenex

23rd December 2010, 11:52

So why do you think media players, not bound by AACS licensing would include Cinavia detection?

GodofaGap

23rd December 2010, 11:56

It's all licensing. If one chooses not to licence (and to obey its requirements) it would be brought to justice, at it provides ways of stealing content protected by intellectual property (accessory to crime).
But even in court it would be pretty hard to hold manufacturers to a license for a medium they are not supporting with their device. You can't copy blurays with a device that doesn't allow to insert bluray discs.

Ghitulescu

23rd December 2010, 13:44

So why do you think media players, not bound by AACS licensing would include Cinavia detection?

I quoted (freely, not to disclose his identity) a statement from one of the manufacturers.

It's not tied to AACS, but the manufacturer may not receive the licences for other items he badly needs, unless he agrees upon cinavia. In the end, cinavia does not affect the playback of own media, just the playback of copied content. Fair enough, no harm done. ;) Even more fair than SCMS, as all the manufacturers still place a CopyOnce even for your own recordings.

setarip_old

23rd December 2010, 21:52

I started this thread for the purpose of discussing the technical aspects of "Cinavia" and not the possible legal ramifications, when I said: It will be interesting to see what others may discover when they test their backups of the legitimate commercial BluRay on more current equipment.

Therefore, I'd appreciate it if we could stay on topic in this thread - and perhaps start a separate thread regarding speculated upon legalities...

dansrfe

24th December 2010, 06:48

coolalibaba

24th December 2010, 09:19

can not agree more.
I started this thread for the purpose of discussing the technical aspects of "Cinavia" and not the possible legal ramifications, when I said:

Therefore, I'd appreciate it if we could stay on topic in this thread - and perhaps start a separate thread regarding speculated upon legalities...

Sharktooth

25th December 2010, 16:05

ps3 dont have support for this...
_
i meant converting to AAC HEv2 SBR+PS and then re-convert to AC3 or whatever the PS3 supports.

Ghitulescu

27th December 2010, 08:43

As far as I understand, I think someone should be trying to make a modified firmware for BD players and PS3's which removes Cinavia detection and then plays the audio back without any problems. I am currently working on reverse-engineering the PS3 firmware for removal of Cinavia but lets see where this goes...

Of course I would appreciate your work, despite I don't own, nor ever owned or will ever own, a PS3.

I just wonder whether won't be better if one simply resists upgrading. I know there's this craze, to update the FW to the latest stand, whether needed or not (which is also aggressively promoted throw all possible channels, including testing articles and various magazines). All repairing centers are also required to update the sent-for-repair devices to the latest stand. I also happen to notice during the past years that, with very few exceptions, there's always a bitter pill-sweet pill issue: in other words, a long-felt-and-advertised-feature (eg DTS MA decoding) is silently coupled with a consumer-fiendish one (like eg cinavia), and the latter is usually coupled with the impossibility to return to a previous state (downgrading is blocked). In my experience, this last item is the best indicator that something bad was done to your gear.

b66pak

27th December 2010, 09:12

ps3 is a primary a gaming device and secondary a multimedia player...so in order to play the latest games upgrading to the last fw in mandatory!
_

SamuriHL

27th December 2010, 15:06

ps3 is a primary a gaming device and secondary a multimedia player...so in order to play the latest games upgrading to the last fw in mandatory!
_

Not just gaming, but, doing anything online with it requires the latest firmware. That's how they pretty much force all of us to update. sigh.

Wilbert

28th December 2010, 18:00

Guys, please stay on topic.

setarip_old

3rd January 2011, 00:09

Click on the following link:

http://forum.digital-digest.com/showpost.php?p=587581&postcount=1

Apparently a tiny change in code makes a world of difference!

a randomized variable was made a constant instead, the hack means that any code can now be signed to made to look like officially sanctioned code, and there's not a thing Sony can do about it.

In other words, the PS3 can no longer tell legal, authorized software apart from pirated ones that have been signed using the leaked key.If I'm interpreting its potential correctly, if the hackers who came up with this are not overly greedy (as are, apparently, the creators of "PSJailbreak device"), I believe this could send the Cinavia folks back to the drawing board...

Somewhat reminiscent of applying a marking pen to Track 0 of SONY music CDs ;>}

SamuriHL

3rd January 2011, 00:33

I'm not sure exactly how you're drawing that conclusion from the announcement that code signing is broken? :confused: What does that have to do with Cinavia detection?

Morbo

3rd January 2011, 00:45

Is there a hardware list to test against?...
Some have said WDTV and maybe Seagate's version are possibly in there...but..

Chinese BR players,.may...like early Apex and other DVD players,possibly disable it to get "pirates" in on sales.

I just see no way to unencode this crap...

What would be great,..would be to find a way to
emulate the codes and bury it in the MKV or whatever
streams and fool the HW.

"Insert the A-Team song here"

Morbo

3rd January 2011, 00:47

I'm not sure exactly how you're drawing that conclusion from the announcement that code signing is broken? :confused: What does that have to do with Cinavia detection?

If you can break open the firmware,...and compare FW versions that include it against the ones that do not(pre 2009),...then that code could explain more how this crud works.

AFIK

SamuriHL

3rd January 2011, 00:51

If you can break open the firmware,...and compare FW versions that include it against the ones that do not(pre 2009),...then that code could explain more how this crud works.

AFIK

That's not what was said.

If I'm interpreting its potential correctly, if the hackers who came up with this are not overly greedy (as are, apparently, the creators of "PSJailbreak device"), I believe this could send the Cinavia folks back to the drawing board...

I want to know how *being able to sign code to run on the PS3* is going to send Cinavia back to the drawing board. They're completely different issues. Yes, you can install stuff on the PS3 now. That's kuel, yes, but, has nothing at all to do with the Cinavia detection code built into the software player that the PS3 uses. That player, btw, has been updated for more than just Cinavia, so, even if you could somehow rip out the player parts from an earlier firmware and install it on your later firmware to overwrite the current, Cinavia infested player, you may run into disc compatibility issues. In any case, I don't see how this spells the end of Cinavia on the PS3 just with that announcement. It's a very awesome development for the PS3 community, yes, but, not Cinavia related IMO unless I'm missing something.

setarip_old

3rd January 2011, 04:02

@SamuriHL

Hi!

1) If I understand their accomplishment, just as it would allow for the reintroduction of Linux to the PS3, it would also allow for the rollback of the PS3 firmware to prior to the inclusion of Cinavia-related code.

2) Curious, IIRC, you didn't voice similar concerns/questions when I earlier posted about the potential of the "PSJailbreak" device - only (as I stated) that it was extemely high-priced.

Perhaps some of the software engineers (Doom9 members and/or others that you know) will post regarding the possibilities.

SamuriHL

3rd January 2011, 04:21

1) Rolling back the firmware is fine, I suppose, but, it still causes the problem of not being able to use the PS3 for any online purposes. You will then be stuck with an outdated player that may have compatibility issues with discs going forward. This is no different than my idea of keeping a backup copy of the latest software players on the PC that don't contain Cinavia and using them when playing a Cinavia infected backup. So yea, that's definitely a possibility if you're willing to sacrifice online functionality of your PS3 and to use an old version of the PS3's player.

2) I didn't think of it until now, that's why. :)

In any case, if your plan is to roll back the firmware to pre-Cinavia, then absolutely, you're correct, that this will work. That wasn't how I was reading your statement when you said it rendered Cinavia useless, but, if you're willing to give up having the latest firmware, this is at least a viable option so long as there's no update needed to play the actual disc.

What would be really neat is if "they" could figure out how to hack the old player into new firmware, sign the firmware, and allow both a Cinavia free experience AND online capabilities. That would be much more interesting I think. :)

setarip_old

3rd January 2011, 04:34

One step at a time ;>}

BTW (I'm not "into" gaming) From what I've read, many games don't need to access the Internet for anything other than as a form of copy protection...

SamuriHL

3rd January 2011, 04:37

I don't want to get offtopic but I'll just say that I BELIEVE to do things like netflix streaming and hulu plus, etc, you need to have the latest firmware. To make it an "all purpose video device" I would think those options would be necessary for a lot of people. Myself included. :)

dansrfe

3rd January 2011, 05:47

Once the PS3 has already been hacked who cares about Cinavia? Just load a homebrew media player app or play the file on linux. I fail to see how Cinavia is still an issue if the firmware has already been exploited and hacked.

A.Fenderson

3rd January 2011, 09:10

I'm assuming that writing a full-featured FOSS blu-ray media player app is non-trivial, as evidenced by the fact that one doesn't even exist for x86.

Ghitulescu

3rd January 2011, 10:03

1) Rolling back the firmware is fine, I suppose, but, it still causes the problem of not being able to use the PS3 for any online purposes. You will then be stuck with an outdated player that may have compatibility issues with discs going forward. This is no different than my idea of keeping a backup copy of the latest software players on the PC that don't contain Cinavia and using them when playing a Cinavia infected backup. So yea, that's definitely a possibility if you're willing to sacrifice online functionality of your PS3 and to use an old version of the PS3's player.

I simply fail to see the mirage of "being online". Maybe I'm outdated myself too, but has the "online access" some killer advantages that one can accept cinavia or other nasty copy-protection?

Maybe it's also true what I said before, that PS3 is a game console with BD-playing facility. :rolleyes:

My experience with FW and various devices, of all kind, told me that once a nasty feature has been implemented, there's no possibility to "turn back time" - no downgrade possible. I'll be glad to be wrong.

xenex

3rd January 2011, 11:02

I have to agree with Ghitulescu's basic idea. There was once a time when manufacturers sent out firmware updates and they were a "good thing." Updates to MB BIOS added support for new hardware (USB,etc.), updates to optical drives added support for newer (faster, etc.) media, and so on.

Now (last few years) we have to FEAR the updates! They may not add anything at all, but just eliminate features. I think most here have read this (or similar):

http://gadgetsteria.com/2010/04/22/updated-ps3-eula-gives-sony-complete-control-to-issue-updates-even-without-end-user-knowledgeapproval/

I don't own anything SONY by choice, but it is a scary trend when manufacturers start to force updates which are really downgrades and take away support for features which used to work.

But so far, I really only see SONY doing this. I hope the trend does not start to include others.

<sarcasm>
NEWSALERT: 2012 Sony PS3 FW Update 4.8 - Features: New Message "All PS3 uses are now disabled. New PS4 available for $1000 at www.sonystyle.com"
</sarcasm>

SamuriHL

3rd January 2011, 15:13

I simply fail to see the mirage of "being online". Maybe I'm outdated myself too, but has the "online access" some killer advantages that one can accept cinavia or other nasty copy-protection?

Then why get a PS3 at all? I mean, it's a decent blu-ray player, but, there's far better stand alones if all you're looking for is blu-ray playback. Myself, I hardly ever use it for blu-ray. I have an HTPC for that. Nonetheless, many people DO use it as an all purpose machine as that's what it's marketed for. Those people would love to be rid of Cinavia on it, but, at the same time, not lose all the rest of the functionality in the box.

Maybe it's also true what I said before, that PS3 is a game console with BD-playing facility. :rolleyes:

It does more than those 2 things alone. I pointed out a few more things that I personally do with mine than just play games and watch Blu-rays. It's quite the versatile little toy, which is probably why Sony focused Cinavia on it first. It is, after all, one of the most widely available blu-ray players. Adding Cinavia to it was easy for Sony, and made sense. (We could argue just how many people do in fact use it as a blu-ray player, but, for the purposes of Cinavia discussion, 100% do. ;))

My experience with FW and various devices, of all kind, told me that once a nasty feature has been implemented, there's no possibility to "turn back time" - no downgrade possible. I'll be glad to be wrong.

Yea, I agree on this one. Being able to turn the clock back and at least have the option to go back to pre-Cinavia firmware is good for some people. I'm not sure how much else has changed between the time Cinavia was added and the latest firmware, but, if you're playing backups, assumably you've either done a movie only without all the BD-J stuff that typically causes the need for updated players, or maybe you're streaming. So, maybe my concern about using an old version of the player isn't completely valid. So long as you only ever use backups, you're unlikely to run into a compatibilty issue.

Now, ideally, as I said, *I* would like to see the old player hacked into the latest firmware, signed, and released. That would be TRULY useful IMO.

Ghitulescu

3rd January 2011, 20:42

But so far, I really only see SONY doing this. I hope the trend does not start to include others.
Let's fill in the Hall of shame with other names of the same caliber:
Plextor (CD and DVD-writers)
Humax (DVB STBs)

Of course there are others, including Panasonic and Sharp and JVC and Samsung and so on, but since I don't own such gear I can express myself in an authoritative manner.

There's however a good thing, everything that Sony created on its own ended sooner or later at the history garbage can: SuperCassette, MiniDisk, MicroMV, MemoryStick, soon PS3 ;)

Coming back to the OT, the Intellectual Property is actually the last thing the Western World possess, as all the manufacturing centers were relocated to China. So they enforce them to squeeze money so long they can (I mean until the Chinese will be able to copy the technology, too) ... but I don't care, for many sound reasons.

setarip_old

3rd January 2011, 23:01

@Ghitulescu

Coming back to the OT...Yet again, please DO come back to my original topic (See Post #1 of this thread) - Overcoming CINAVIA

@xenex

Actually, the first Cinavia-infected release was "The Losers", a Warner Bros. release. So far, all other such releases have been by SONY.

SamuriHL

3rd January 2011, 23:16

Actually, the first Cinavia-infected release was "The Losers", a Warner Bros. release. So far, all other such releases have been by SONY.

Has there not been another WB Cinavia infected release since The Losers? Fascinating. I haven't been keeping score in regards to the studios that have Cinavia embedded in some of their releases. I would have thought WB would start using it more.

SamuriHL

3rd January 2011, 23:17

So, back on the topic of DEFEATING Cinavia, this link was just posted on SlySoft:

http://www.mkv2vob.com/showthread.php?tid=1962

That's extremely interesting!

setarip_old

3rd January 2011, 23:31

@samuriHL

Actually, the link you provided is to "mkv2vob Forums" (not Slysoft) - but initially interesting, nonetheless.

Is this something you've tried and, if so, confirmed as working?

SamuriHL

3rd January 2011, 23:35

@samuriHL

Actually, the link you provided is to "mkv2vob Forums" (not Slysoft) - but initially interesting, nonetheless.

Is this something you've tried and, if so, confirmed as working?

Um, didn't you read what I said? :) The *LINK* was posted on the SlySoft forum so I copied it and posted it here. :)

And no, it was JUST posted on SlySoft before I posted it here. And from the looks of the posts on the mkv2vob forum, this particular release looks broken anyway. I'm going to keep an eye on their forum for sure, though. This could be an interesting development.

setarip_old

3rd January 2011, 23:43

@SamuriHLUm, didn't you read what I said?Read, yes - absorbed, obviously not ;>}

It will be interesting to see if there are further developments...

SamuriHL

3rd January 2011, 23:49

@SamuriHLRead, yes - absorbed, obviously not ;>}

ROFL! :D It happens to all of us.

It will be interesting to see if there are further developments...

Yea, definitely. And since the source code was posted, as well, I'm sure some brave souls will take a look at it and be able to figure out what they're doing to break Cinavia detection. I'm quite impressed if it works. Unfortunately with the current version of the tool seemingly broken, it'll be difficult to determine if it actually works for now.

SamuriHL

4th January 2011, 02:09

The author just posted this on the SlySoft forum:

I am the author of that program.
It doesn't convert/transcode to PCM, it does SPDIF conversion.
The PS3 "thinks" its playing a PCM, but really its bitstreaming a DTS to the amp.
Source code
http://www.3r1c.eu/mkv2vob/dtsinpcm.c
I can assure you it does work.

This particular method may not be very useful for anydvd though, it only works on ps3 and requires an external DTS amp, otherwise you just get static.

That's a pretty sweet idea!

setarip_old

4th January 2011, 02:34

The tool as described by its author, "3r1c", sounds like it's a similar (not identical) concept to the hardware-only procedure in item #5 of Post #405 by "Eza17" (and confirmed as working by "b66pak" in Post #411) of this thread, to wit: 5. A fix that worked for me on the PS3 is to tweak the sound settings in the following way: Go to settings > Sound Settings, select the optical option and place a tick against every possible output type. Set the option relating to sound from multiple sources to 'On'. For some reason, with these sound options set, the Cinavia watermark isn't picked up

A.Fenderson

4th January 2011, 02:41

So now the question becomes: will Cinavia be updated so that implementing devices not only decode all LPCM tracks as such and check for the watermark, but also check all LPCM tracks for embedded DTS/DD/etc signals, and if detected, decode as such and again check for the watermark?

setarip_old

4th January 2011, 03:28

@A.Fenderson

Hi!

As I said in my earlier post:"I believe this could send the Cinavia folks back to the drawing board"

And who could ask for anything more? The chase is on ;>}

As one would have anticipated when "The Losers" first hit the streets, it was only going to be a short period of time until methods of defeating Cinavia would be discovered. Quite honestly I, for one, did not anticipate that apparent solutions (four - one software, one hardware/firmware mod, one multi-audio input "trick, and remarkably, simply changing the state of ONE VARIABLE!)) would appear this early on.

All four of the solutions address only the PS3. This is logical and beneficial, in light of the size of the PS3s user base versus the user bases of each individual brand of standalone Blu-ray player. And it may put smiles on the faces of some, to appreciate that, with the exception of one title, thus far all Cinavia-infected discs have been SONY releases. I'm sure solutions regarding standalones will follow.

I believe we'll all be delighted with the existing and near future solutions to come. Kudos to those who have the knowledge and dedication to solve these periodic "mysteries" - and are good enough to share them with the community ;>}

flambot

4th January 2011, 05:53

Kudos to those who have the knowledge and dedication to solve these periodic "mysteries" - and are good enough to share them with the community ;>}

Amen to that brother!

derbeDeus

4th January 2011, 11:51

The author just posted this on the SlySoft forum:

That's a pretty sweet idea!

I tried that a long time ago, but could not find an external decoder that will like the dts-in-pcm signal coming from ps3. It is a sweet idea, but not much applicable :(

Eza17

4th January 2011, 12:30

The tool as described by its author, "3r1c", sounds like it's a similar (not identical) concept to the hardware-only procedure in item #5 of Post #405 by "Eza17" (and confirmed as working by "b66pak" in Post #411) of this thread, to wit:

Another workaround for the PS3 is to use a DLNA media server (sorry if someone has already mentioned this). I have tried streaming with TVersity and cinavia is completely ignored when watching a movie by this method.

A.Fenderson

4th January 2011, 18:09

I tried that a long time ago, but could not find an external decoder that will like the dts-in-pcm signal coming from ps3. It is a sweet idea, but not much applicable :(

Full-bitrate, 48KHz DTS within PCM may not be expected by the majority of DTS-capable receivers, but 44.1KHz DTS-CD style audio might--did your setup allow you to try that? Then again, I don't know if that type of stream can be encapsulated properly in a 48KHz pcm stream, and with the different sampling rates it seems unlikely, besides I think you'd need something like SurCode to reencode down to the lower bit/sampling-rate anyway.

setarip_old

5th January 2011, 23:48

Apparently, the discovery last week by "failOverflow" (of changing the status of a solitary variable) has quickly led to software that will allow users to modify the PS3's firmware.

The potential regarding circumvention of Cinavia protection on PS3s should be all too obvious. Click on the following link:

http://kotaku.com/5725088/you-can-now-install-your-own-custom-ps3-firmware

The Scientist

9th January 2011, 03:19

As I was updating my rebox.NET tool over the weekend I thought I’d have a mess with some Cinavia titles to see if any PS3 settings and/or different output types from rebox.NET could give me successful playback of these titles. Obviously I can only speak for my own setup, FAT PS3 PAL, connected to TV (old plasma) via component cable, standard stereo output leads to TV.

PS3 audio (default): refers to my default audio settings, menu option 'Audio Input Connector /SCART / AV MULTI’
PS3 audio (all enabled): refers to the ‘audio trick’ mentioned in a few places around the net, menu option ‘Optical Digital’ and select all outputs.

http://www.videonet.webspace.virginmedia.com/_gfx/cinavia.png

I tried many sequences of playback order, sometimes MP4 first, sometimes audio default, sometimes playing one then switching to another, the only difference this would make is Cinavia would ‘kick in’ on titles before the 20 minute ‘grace’ period, especially after I’d received a warning then switch to another title. But, like the picture shows, with all the audio outputs ticked, the TS files always played OK, no matter how I tried to get it to fail.

Maybe this info will be of use to some people.

setarip_old

9th January 2011, 07:46

@The Scientist

Hi!

Did I misunderstand your test analysis? Is there a reason you didn't test with a ripped Blu-ray disc and its .M2TS files?

Ghitulescu

9th January 2011, 11:10

Obviously I can only speak for my own setup, FAT PS3 PAL, connected to TV (old plasma) via component cable, standard stereo output leads to TV.

I thought cinavia would be triggered only when using HD audio fully digital :confused: I see now they had a step ahead :mad:

derbeDeus

9th January 2011, 12:24

Obviously I can only speak for my own setup, FAT PS3 PAL, connected to TV (old plasma) via component cable, standard stereo output leads to TV.

And yet you didn't tell us your firmware version.
There is no difference between fat and slim, code-wise.
There is no difference between various Cinavia movies, it's the same watermark in all of them (I mean the digital payload).

SamuriHL

9th January 2011, 14:11

I thought cinavia would be triggered only when using HD audio fully digital :confused: I see now they had a step ahead :mad:

I'm pretty sure I posted my tests from The Losers MP4 with stereo AAC that I made back when the disc first came out. That triggers Cinavia on my PS3 quite well. So yea, it survives all re-encoding and even analog attempts to record it.

The Scientist

9th January 2011, 14:24

Did I misunderstand your test analysis? Is there a reason you didn't test with a ripped Blu-ray disc and its .M2TS files?
Yes I think we have a misunderstanding..... This wasn’t an exhaustive test, this was just me messing whilst I was re-writing all the audio stuff in rebox.NET over the weekend, which neither accepts nor produces .m2ts files and I can hardly put a full .m2ts file on my 4GB FAT32 USB stick for the PS3. I posted my little results just so people could see re-muxing to TS may well be a viable option for watching Cinavia movies on their PS3.

And yet you didn't tell us your firmware version.
There is no difference between fat and slim, code-wise.
There is no difference between various Cinavia movies, it's the same watermark in all of them (I mean the digital payload).
I didn't think anyone here was saying otherwise? But yes, the firmware, my bad, forgot all about that, it's v3.55.

The Scientist

9th January 2011, 14:42

I'm pretty sure I posted my tests from The Losers MP4 with stereo AAC that I made back when the disc first came out. That triggers Cinavia on my PS3 quite well. So yea, it survives all re-encoding and even analog attempts to record it.
The first time I heard about Cinavia was my brother on the phone telling me a warning had just popped up on his PS3, it was the movie 'The Losers'. Speaking as like I knew what I was talking about I told him to just convert it to a different format, which he did, but without success.

We even made an AVI with MP3 audio then used VirtualDub to save a segmented AVI of 10 minute chunks, still, Cinavia message was displayed.

SamuriHL

9th January 2011, 14:52

The first time I heard about Cinavia was my brother on the phone telling me a warning had just popped up on his PS3, it was the movie 'The Losers'. Speaking as like I knew what I was talking about I told him to just convert it to a different format, which he did, but without success.

We even made an AVI with MP3 audio then used VirtualDub to save a segmented AVI of 10 minute chunks, still, Cinavia message was displayed.

That would be typical of my experience with Cinavia, as well. It's not an easy thing to "get rid of". The "loophole" of turning on ALL audio support in the PS3 is just that...a loophole. It's not an effective means of defeating Cinavia. It's simply a "work around" for now.

rotty

9th January 2011, 16:50

That would be typical of my experience with Cinavia, as well. It's not an easy thing to "get rid of". The "loophole" of turning on ALL audio support in the PS3 is just that...a loophole. It's not an effective means of defeating Cinavia. It's simply a "work around" for now.

Cinavis WILL survive in NON HiFi audio, in fact in very poor audio, its not because its clever, its just the way the exsiting audio is altered to encode the Cinavia marks, will atomatically survive. It will survive in telephone audio bandwidth quality.

Its just audio well within the normal audio hearing spectrum, if I record the word "Hello" you would still expect to hear that and understand it even in bad bandwidth recording, its the same with Cinavia, its just the normal audio altered slightly which is then detectable by the Cinavia detection circuit.

Eza17

10th January 2011, 12:26

I think completely 'defeating' cinavia is a bit off yet and the best we can hope for is 'workarounds' in the short term. A workaround is still a defeat for cinavia as it makes the protection useless.

I think my earlier post (no. 405) shows how robust the watermark is, resistant to speeding up/slowing down, not affected when played backwards and contained within every 4 seconds of audio.

SamuriHL

10th January 2011, 13:46

Eza17

10th January 2011, 15:08

I wasn't trying to imply that work arounds are a bad thing. However, the issue with a work around or loophole is that they can be quickly and easily fixed, sending you back to square one. Hence you have to be weary of every new firmware update on the PS3 for fear of them closing this particular loophole. That's all I meant.

I couldn't agree more and of course the present 'workarounds' are only relevant to PS3's, not other players.

I think it will be interesting to see how long it takes them to patch the main loophole (audio settings 'tweak'), if it's even possible to fix with a patch. Obviously they're not going to rush a firmware update out just for this but the interesting thing will be if it is included in the next release.

setarip_old

10th January 2011, 23:01

SamuriHL

11th January 2011, 01:21

That info is highly controversial from what I've seen out there. The reason I say that is because Sony counts EVERY PS3 as a BD player, which in fact is not true. So no, I've never seen "actual" BD usage figures that are even remotely considered accurate.

setarip_old

11th January 2011, 02:16

@SamuriHL

Hi!

It wouldn't be controversial to me, for the purpose I stated ("Just to get a feel...").

Therefore, if you can point to, or state, such information, I'd appreciate it.

I'm desirous of comparing the total number of PS3s sold to the toal number of (all brands combined, excluding the PS3) standalone Blu-ray players sold...

SamuriHL

11th January 2011, 03:34

It's been a while since I last read about it. I can't seem to find the article I had read. There were a lot of complaints about Sony's reporting of *EVERY* PS3 sold counted as a blu-ray player that's actually used. The reality is that not everyone uses the PS3 as a blu-ray player. Some people ONLY use it as a media player. So the hard figures are going to be difficult to find at best. I definitely understand what you're wishing to compare. I myself would find such a comparison very very interesting. I hope someone somewhere can point you to it. I'd be very curious to see how big the PS3 is as a percentage of the total for actually used blu-ray players.

A.Fenderson

11th January 2011, 03:53

There were a lot of complaints about Sony's reporting of *EVERY* PS3 sold counted as a blu-ray player that's actually used. The reality is that not everyone uses the PS3 as a blu-ray player. Some people ONLY use it as a media player.

If I had to guess, I would say even more people use it only as a video game console. :)

SamuriHL

11th January 2011, 04:19

If I had to guess, I would say even more people use it only as a video game console. :)

Yea, that was the controversy. It was speculated that the majority of people bought it strictly as a game console. But Sony didn't see it that way and in fact used sales numbers of PS3's sold as "evidence" that blu-ray was winning against HD DVD. Microsoft couldn't counter because they didn't include the HD DVD drive as part of the 360...instead making it an addon. Anyway, back to the point, it's going to be EXTREMELY difficult to find that information. I just did a search and couldn't turn up anything useful. If someone has this information, I'm sure seta and I would be extremely happy to have it.

setarip_old

11th January 2011, 05:04

Please stay focussed - As I said in Post #491, the only thing I'm seeking iswithout regard to usage, a comparison of the PS3 installed versus the installed user base(s) of all standalone blu-ray players. The purpose is to try and appreciate the possible impact of "Cinavia" on the Blu-ray viewing world as a whole.

As such, my quest(ion) has nothing to do with gaming console comparisons, non-Blu-ray usage of PS3s, or disputes between MS and SONY...

Adub

11th January 2011, 07:23

Just got this email from DVDFAB:

It is pleasure to take this opportunity to share an exciting news that DVDFab has the power to tackle the playback problem of Cinavia protected Blu-ray on PS3. This is definitely a great breakthrough as DVDFab is the world first universal solution to play backup of Cinavia protected Blu-ray disc on PS3.

Now DVDFab can copy any Blu-ray disc with Cinavia watermark, and create a protected disc BDMV-REC disc which can be played on PS3. Why BDMV-REC? Since it is very much the same as the original BDMV-ROM (the original disc), with menus, interactivity, BD-Live, etc. So from now on, with DVDFab, you can enjoy backup disc of any Cinavia protected Blu-ray movies on your PS3.

What is more, DVDFab is working on other Cinavia solutions as well. No time later, a solution which supports protected BDAV and is more compatible with most BD players will come out for use.

We hope all the effort we paid will meet the needs of more and more global users and make DVDFab become a world-renowned brand.

setarip_old

11th January 2011, 11:16

Ghitulescu

11th January 2011, 11:29

If this is borne out by user testing (And I see no reason why it wouldn't be. "fengtao" doesn't "blow smoke"), it sounds like it may already be necessary for the "Cinavia" folks to "go back to the drawing board" (as I previously suggested might have to occur in the near future) - or, perhaps, just tuck their tails between their legs and disappear into the night.

No need, so far only 2 embodiments of the 128 possibilities (current licencing stand) were implemented. Since cinavia is SW-based (ie it requires no HW chip onboard) future and mandatory FW releases would close this loophole, too.

However, the combined non-acceptance of cinavia titles by consumer and methods to circumvent this protection might have the same result as the 2004 action against unCDs.

xenex

11th January 2011, 11:38

Hmm, what is now interesting is that a "DVD" now includes Cinavia - "Takers"

http://www.dvdempire.com/Exec/v4_item.asp?item_id=1557091&tab=5&back=1&anchor=1#topoftabs

No doubt that this is not for "Cinavia-protected" DVD players, but instead to close the 'loophole' of BD-Rips being remuxed with DVD AC3 audio. If the DVD AC3 audio is watermarked in the same way as the lossless BD audio, I'd expect that there will be no PS3-playable version of "Takers" at all.

fengtao

11th January 2011, 12:16

http://forum.dvdfab.com/showthread.php?t=7102

We noticed that too, so simply remuxing DVD AC3 audio into Blu-ray backup will not work on PS3.

Our solution at DVDFab for Cinavia on PS3 will be out very soon.

setarip_old

11th January 2011, 12:18

@Ghitulescu

You say:Since cinavia is SW-based (ie it requires no HW chip onboard) future and mandatory FW releases would close this loophole, too.

1) If you're correct, it's rather odd that only three or 4 standalone players (and not a SONY amongst them) are "fitted" for Cinavia.

2) I'm guessing that you haven't clicked on the links in my Posts #448 and #478 in this thread. It seems that the PS3 firmware is irreversibly hacked.

Eza17

11th January 2011, 16:28

In an attempt to get a feel for just how significant a factor the PS3 is vis-a-vis "Cinavia", I attempted to perform what I thought would be a relatively simple search for a comparison of the PS3 installed versus the installed user base(s) of all standalone blu-ray players.

While I can readily locate similar information, comparing the PS3 to other "game machines", to my surprise, I've thus far been unable to locate such information regarding blu-ray players.

Is anyone else able to provide such information?

Going back to this question, the best indication I could find of what sort of percentage we are talking about is given in the following article:

http://www.twice.com/article/461843-Blu_ray_Growth_Seen_Despite_IP_Streaming.php

Basically this is saying that 25 million households in America will have bluray capability by the end of the year (doesn't make it clear wether that is 2010 or 2011). The figure of 25 million does include ps3's and the article also says that until 2010, ps3's had the largest share of the bluray player market but were surpassed in this year.

Even if it was surpassed, that still puts the ps3 way above any other player. I know this article only talks about America but it does give a rough bench mark.

Ghitulescu

11th January 2011, 17:16

@Ghitulescu

You say:

1) If you're correct, it's rather odd that only three or 4 standalone players (and not a SONY amongst them) are "fitted" for Cinavia.

2) I'm guessing that you haven't clicked on the links in my Posts #448 and #478 in this thread. It seems that the PS3 firmware is irreversibly hacked.

to 1. - I am correct, however the algorithm is quite complicated and needs some man-hours to fit it into the current FW; and of course many HW manufacturers resist cinavia, at least for the sold units, not because they are doing a favour to us, but because implementing it into "old" gear incurs only costs but no benefits. I think they [re]negociate the deals again now - you know, Hollywood is also dependent on HW manufacturers, too, a sort of symbiosis.

to 2. - I've seen the posts. It also says there that the copyrights will be respected, this statement implies many (legal) issues ... ;)

Additional point: PS3 is not a BD player, it's a game console with BD playback option (as correctly someone said earlier). It plays the role of a laboratory white mouse - it was used by Sony to win the BD-HDDVD war and it is still used to test various techniques, including cinavia.

My deep belive is that PS3 was a real alternative to standalones only when those cost 400€ or more (2007 and earlier). Someone paying now 300-400€ for PS3 to use it exclusively as a BD player is simply mad: a SAP costs ~100€ and draws 14W, a PS3 bare costs 300€ and needs 197W. PS3 is also noisy and does not fit into a HiFi rack. And it would cause family wars: the father watching BDs vs. the kid playing games, the same time of course.

If FengTao assertions are correct, that PS3 could be forced somehow to play cinavied backups, then he won the battle but not the war: obliging the players to be online and since the FW being now silently updated, the outcome is simply reversible. Anytime now ... I would prefere AnyDVD and DVDfab be concerned with real BD players, they outnumber PS3 by 1000x ...

Eza17

11th January 2011, 18:50

... Anytime now ... I would prefere AnyDVD and DVDfab be concerned with real BD players, they outnumber PS3 by 1000x ...

I think this is an underestimate of the number of PS3's out there if you look at the link to the thread I posted above. Indications would be that the PS3 out-numbers any other individual player and is just under 50% of the total BD devices ever sold.

I do agree it is primarily a games console but a quick search on the web shows a lot of people also use it as a media player.

Ghitulescu

11th January 2011, 18:57

I think this is an underestimate of the number of PS3's out there if you look at the link to the thread I posted above. Indications would be that the PS3 out-numbers any other individual player and is just under 50% of the total BD devices ever sold.

One of my friends has access to the sales figures of one of the biggest A/V chain in Germany, I agree it's not 1000:1 but it's definitively not 1:1, it was in the past maybe ... but this is not important now, defeating cinavia is ... the simplest way of doint it is to keep the FW updates away from the player ;)

mike20021969

11th January 2011, 19:50

Our solution at DVDFab for Cinavia on PS3 will be out very soon.
This sounds like great news for PS3 users.

setarip_old

11th January 2011, 20:07

@Ghitulescu

1) Additional point: PS3 is not a BD player, it's a game console with BD playback option (as correctly someone said earlier).What is your point in stating something everyone knows?

2) I've seen the posts. It also says there that the copyrights will be respectedWhere did you see this? If you're referring to the "failOverflow" video, there was a line on a slide about how they got their name that said "No trademark infringement" - very different than copyrights. Or are you referring to the more recent hack, of which the article states, "KaKaRoTo says 'this custom firmware is really meant for future homebrew installation', and in addition 'will not allow piracy'?."

Besides, a statement that such hacks of this nature would not infringe on copyrights would have assuredly been made with tongue planted firmly in cheek - especially since the "failOverflow" group acknowledges that their previous have been used by "others" to circumvent game protection ;>}

3)many HW manufacturers resist cinavia, at least for the sold units...because implementing it into "old" gear incurs only costs but no benefits.Whether regarding already sold or future sales, there is the same "benefit" or lack thereof to hardware-only manufacturers (SONY, of course, is a vertically and horizontally integrated entity. Its studios would theoretically benefit from reduced piracy).

4)I would prefere AnyDVD and DVDfab be concerned with real BD players, they outnumber PS3 by 1000x

Based on the reasonable-sounding statistics in the article linked to and quoted by "Eza17" in post #504, you're statement appears to be specious. Certainly, there have not been 25 BILLION (1,000 times 25 million) standalone players sold in the U.S. or anywhere else.

5) My deep belive (sic)...My, but you do enjoy wandering off the road ;>} BTW, in seeking installed user base, there's no need or point in trying to discern whether a purchaser of a PS3 uses it "exclusively as a BD player". All that's relevant is that a piece of equipment/hardware that can play Blu-ray discs has been purchased.

6) he won the battle but not the warYes, as I've already said in two or three earlier posts, resolving this initial iteration of Cinavia will "send them back to the drawing board". However, based on the information in the articles and video of the most recent two links I provided, it seems clear that presently, "the door is wide open" to access and manipulate the PS3's firmware, with SONY unable to prevent such activity (Again, PRESENTLY).

setarip_old

11th January 2011, 20:08

@Eza17

Thank you very much for locating that link ;>}

Ghitulescu

11th January 2011, 20:29

1) What is your point in stating something everyone knows?
It was in the context, and even if extracted therefrom, it would say that Sony won't loose anything (now that it won the format war and manufactures erh labels BD players) by withdrawing the BD playback capability, erh, like it did with SACD playback, should PS3 be considered less safe.
2) Where did you see this? If you're referring to the "failOverflow" video, there was a line on a slide about how they got their name that said "No trademark infringement" - very different than copyrights. Besides, a statement that such hacks of this nature would not infringe on copyrights would have assuredly been made with tongue planted firmly in cheek - especially since the "failOverflow" group acknowledges that their previous have been used by "others" to circumvent game protection ;>}
My mistake, I've read the posts long time ago and I reacted only now. Things got somehow mixed up :( I know the diference between tardemark and copyright, incidentally.
3)Whether regarding already sold or future sales, there is the same "benefit" or lack thereof to hardware-only manufacturers (SONY, of course, is a vertically and horizontally integrated entity. Its studios would theoretically benefit from reduced piracy).
Sony drew the right conclusions after the Betamax case ;)
4)
Based on the reasonable-sounding statistics in the article linked to and quoted by "Eza17" in post #504, you're statement appears to be specious. Certainly, there have not been 25 BILLION (1,000 times 25 million) standalone players sold in the U.S. or anywhere else.
As I said before, info from someone having access to some sales figures showed that PS3 sales were deep down compared to SAPs. I exagerated a bit, thinking of point 1, of course - should Sony withdraw the BD playback capability or "castrate" it ...
6) Yes, as I've already said in two or three earlier posts, resolving this initial iteration of Cinavia will "send them back to the drawing board". However, based on the information in the articles and video of the most recent two links I provided, it seems clear that presently, "the door is wide open" to access and manipulate the PS3's firmware, with SONY unable to prevent such activity (Again, PRESENTLY).
As I said, the patents I've read protect around 7 different types of embedding a "non-volatile" watermark (and combinations thereof), there's no need to go back to work, just to enforce them via AACS.

The only soluton is to refuse to buy the affected titles. In combination with solutions to copy them.

mike20021969

11th January 2011, 21:20

doesn't make it clear wether that is 2010 or 2011
As the story was posted 6th January 2011, then it MUST be referring to 2011 :rolleyes:

setarip_old

11th January 2011, 22:54

rotty

11th January 2011, 23:24

The only soluton is to refuse to buy the affected titles. In combination with solutions to copy them.

I know I keep saying this, but the above is the answer, we REALLY do have Ultimate power, DONT BUY THESE DISKS.

There is no weapon in their arsenal to combat that.

jdobbs

12th January 2011, 06:02

If you could get those other 500 million people that have no idea what "Cinavia" is and have no interest in finding out to agree with you, then it just might work.

Ghitulescu

12th January 2011, 07:28

If you could get those other 500 million people that have no idea what "Cinavia" is and have no interest in finding out to agree with you, then it just might work.

This is a start ;) and if more and more magazines and web sites would join the battle, like it was the case in 2004, maybe we'll get the same result, or at least a significant price drop

Eza17

12th January 2011, 10:46

@Eza17, @mike20021969

I just read the article you, "Eza17", provided a link to. My interpretation is different than yours. Actually, the fact that the article is dated January 6, 2011makes it certain that the article cannot possibly be providing results for the calendar year 2011. Rather, the tenor of the remarks indicates that the figures are projected FYE December 31, 2010, based on actual results for the three quarters ended September 30, 2010.

Unfortunately, there's nothing in the article that allows for determining the PS3's share of "Blu-ray playback capability".

Hi, I agree with you that the figures seem to be for 2010 and this is confirmed by another article I found from the Digital Entertainment Group:

http://www.degonline.org/pressreleases/2011/f_Q410.pdf

From scouting the web, I could only find a statement on US PS3 sales up to April 2010 which was then at 12 million (out of the worldwide sales of 41.6 million). Even on the April figure, it's clear that the PS3 is a substantial 'chunk' of the bluray player market.

rotty

12th January 2011, 13:05

If you could get those other 500 million people that have no idea what "Cinavia" is and have no interest in finding out to agree with you, then it just might work.

Im sorry to say this JD but that is a defeatist attitude that will always lead to, of course, DEFEAT.

Im in the glass half full club. Believe it or not, blu ray is still to a great extent an enthusiast interest and although not the entire market, it is a high proportion and they DO know about Cinavia.

You are one of the HI PROFILE people on here and I have to say I would like you to give words of encouragement to the fight against un fairness. We can make a big difference.

Spread The Word

jdobbs

12th January 2011, 14:59

No. Defeatist is saying "We can't undo Cinavia, so let's boycott it." If something can be added to audio, it can also be removed. And it will, you just have to give it time. Remember how daunting CSS or AACS was? Remember when they held up production of players so that BD+ could be further developed? Did a boycott solve that issue? At some point some clever young person is going to disassemble the firmware on a Cinavia player and see what it is looking for.

You're not going to get the world excited about Cinavia... hell, you can't even get me excited about it and I'm actually interested. So... change the things you can, accept the things you can't, and learn to know the difference. A few months or a year from now we'll all be talking about how there used to be something called "Cinavia" and we'll be sending checks to DVDFab or Slysoft -- either that or we'll be looking at the free code from some 19 year old kid in nowheresville is sending around. The topic then will be whatever "spinavia" comes next.

I think the biggest obstacle to a Cinavia solution is that the limited number of titles using it isn't enough to get hackers excited yet.

Just my humble opinion.

Ghitulescu

12th January 2011, 17:08

rotty

12th January 2011, 20:21

xenex

13th January 2011, 09:54

Just to add some Cinavia technical info. I just came across, a poster on the Slysoft forums has done some (very minor) disassembly of some watermark code that I find interesting:

http://forum.slysoft.com/showpost.php?p=296946&postcount=1122

And, although I had read the patents before, I just re-read them and it's interesting how "clever" our "enemies" are - from the patents:

However, it is not necessary for every embedder and/or extractor to contain all possible watermarking technologies. The objective is to keep results of an attack inconsistent, unpredictable, and confusing both to the attacker and to the user of pirated content. For example, it may be desirable to lead the attacker to believe that an attack is successful, and to distribute his results, and then to find out that this is not the case, resulting in the attacker's loss of credibility. Similarly, it may be desirable to make the pirates invest time and effort to find a procedure, or a ‘black box’ that enables piracy only to discover that it works only for special cases.

In the case of embedders, it may be advantageous to reserve some of the embedding technologies for future use, as attacks on already deployed watermarks grow more sophisticated and more successful. Generally, the selection of watermarking technologies in the embedder must be as flexible and as dynamic as possible. This could mean that the selection of particular embedding technologies could be done in accordance with the degree of success or failure of piracy attacks on already released content.

Similarly, not all watermarking technologies may be implemented in each extraction device. This would simplify implementation of extractors in consumer devices and reduce silicon area and processing load. It will also make extractor performance unpredictable, as extraction results would differ from one device to another, making attacks inconsistent and frustrating to casual pirates.

The above quote is from here:

http://www.freepatentsonline.com/7369677.html

Also interesting is the Ed Felten (et. al.) attack on the SDMI challenge back in 2000:

http://www.usenix.org/events/sec01/craver.pdf

I post this just to possibly generate some technical discussion. I only know a very little about audio processing, but a bit more about assembly / machine code programming. But I find the technical details fascinating in any case. I'm a geek. :p

Ghitulescu

13th January 2011, 18:03

Thank you Xenex for giving support for what I've said and keep saying. Everyone keeps talking about experiencing cinavia but the same everyone didn't care to read the patents, to know what to fight to.
The aim of the studios is not to create a bulletproof protection, but to manage to have one strong enough not to be bypassed by Average Joe Jr., then to banish the tools that allow this - there's a long list of "illegal" tools in Germany - this also explains why companies like Elby moved to fiscal paradieses, before getting out of business ... It is known that a hacker can eventually crack the defense, just that hackers are few and they are somehow tolerated (like the fleas on a dog), I said 10% damages.

HWK

13th January 2011, 19:33

The first solution to disable Cinavia is here. DVDFab has a new way of creating backups so they don't trigger Cinavia anymore. This solution is particularly useful for PS3 users who were the most affected by Cinavia. What makes it a great solution is that the disc is much like the original, a protected backup so the Cinavia-enabled player will see it as trusted source and will play it back just like the original. People have made protected (isos) backups in the past, but those had the disadvantage that they only worked with the programs that made them; well, these protected backups are supposed to work on standalone players too.

Technical details: the discs created are called BDMV-REC as they are AACS protected recordable BDMV. Another solution would be AACS protected BDAV, like the ones produced by Japanese BD recorders.

Requirements:
original Blu-ray disc with Cinavia watermark. DVDFab and DVDFab Passkey will tell if you have such a disc
a BD-RE (recommended for initial tests) or BD-R disc to store the protected backup
a BD writer
updated writing software. DVDFab checks for it anyway

Pros:
It is a solution to disable Cinavia, exactly as it is disabled for the original disc, due to (AACS) protection layer being active.
DVDFab does all the tricks involved to create such a protected backup at a push of a button.
The disc can preserve all the original features like menus, interactivity, BD-Live.
Broad firmware support: PS3 users with firmware from 1.60 and up to 3.55 can use BDMV-REC discs; fw3.55 is the latest at the time of writing.
At any time, DVDFab or DVDFab Passkey can be used to remove the protection, if you need to.
This is kind of an official solution, because it involves support from AACS standards, the same standards that force adoption of Cinavia
While we tested it on PS3 for now, it may work on other players too. As results from tests will become available we'll update you with. Also it seems that only PS3 has Cinavia detector in current, up-to-date firmware (others disabled it, like LG, or just announced it for future firmware).

Cons:
BDMV-REC is not implemented by all players. BD Players implemented Blu-ray standards as they saw fit to market their products. Not all of them have implemented AACS Recordable BDMV (BDMV-REC). PS3, being one of the best players, did.
If not on PS3, we encourage users to check the playback support for "AACS protected recordable BDMV" either with BD Player support or with a BD-RE.
PC players support protected BDAV, but not BDMV-REC.
Cinavia is not removed, just disabled. Well, whatever works We tried to provide you with a solution asap and this was the quickest.

We plan to add support for the above-mentioned protected BDAV which gives a much broader adoption among BD Players, but does not have all the features: no menu, no interactivity, no BD-live, it simply is a Movie-only format.

Source:
http://forum.dvdfab.com/showthread.php?t=7102

setarip_old

13th January 2011, 20:40

@fengtao

Can this Cinavia-circumventing version of DVDFab ( wonderful news, by the way ;>} ) be used either presently, or modified, to create an .ISO image file that might then be compressed to BD9 or BD5 and, therefore, not require a Blu-ray burner (a BD ROM would suffice)?

rotty

13th January 2011, 23:31

Now I would say im an optimist and don’t want to put a downer on this but remember the extract from Xenex a few posts ago.

I have fears that the measures so far can may well be ephemeral.
Working disks produced by this method may soon be coasters.

Looking at this from the other side of the fence, as Xenex pointed out, this is the sort of thing they have been waiting for. Have people think that its cracked or circumvented, let it go on for a while then ...

If you were a power in the implementation of Cinavia what would you do for the next f/w update.

Yep that’s right, one of the things you had in mind all along, have the player check the disk itself, i.e. have it check the type of disk, is it a ROM, simple as that. If it is NOT a ROM and has Cinavia watermark then .............

When I read this back to myself it makes me sound a right kill joy and ungratful for any efforts to combat this which I am certainly not, but I am a realist, and it is just an honest opinion. I hope im very wrong.

setarip_old

14th January 2011, 02:00

rotty

14th January 2011, 14:14

As I've said before, disc copy protection is, and always will be "a cat and mouse game", ever since the "unbreakable" CSS was first defeated. Now that the PS3 has been hacked, purportedly irreversibly, by "Geohot"/George Hotz (acknowledged/confirmed by a lawsuit by SONY), I'd speculate that those who are actively involved in attempting to overcome, circumvent, and/or eliminate Cinavia protection are, for at least these past few days, smiling broadly ;>}

Hi Setarip

Yes but this is very different. When a code was cracked for DVD and BD, the disk you made would work, and in fact work for the lifetime of the disk.

The massive difference with the approach to circumventing Cinavia in the example from DVDFab is that a disk that you have created and that works fine and does not trigger the player into disrrupting playback could suddenly, at some future date, do just that and be useless.

Very very different from say CSS being removed from a DVD etc.

setarip_old

14th January 2011, 20:06

Yes, it's important, as "Rotty" has pointed out, that obviously, a solution that does not incorporate the BDMV disc standard is not a permanent solution.

However, more important is the simple fact that someone has now found (and offered to the community) a way to circumvent the PRESENT methodology employed regarding Cinavia. One does not have to be omniprescient to realize and appreciate that this first professional Cinavia-related success story, combined with (or, likely, resulting from) the purportedly irreversible hacking of the PS3, is not the "end all and be all" in the bigger Blu-ray protection challenge - rather this represents a "shot across the bow" of Verance, that COMPELS Verance to respond.

Prognostications regarding these non-BDMV Blu-rays becoming coasters are likely correct, but unnecessarily defeatist and no big deal - unless you're more concerned about the cost of new blank discs and the time required to make new backups, once the next iteration of Cinavia shows itself and is "resolved" by members of the community.

Without comparing the nature of types of protection, we are all still smiling about the alleged invulnerability of AACS and BD+. On the other hand, one should be aware that, if DVD licensing had been as organized and far reaching as is (apparently) that of Blu-ray licensing. We might all be saddled with several different DVD players capable of playing ONLY specially formatted discs - such as those players Disney distributes with screeners.

There are just so many ways one can say and recognize that this is an ongoing "cat and mouse game" - and historically, the "cat" (the community) has eventually always caught the "mouse" (the protection schemes)...

rotty

14th January 2011, 20:14

There are just so many ways one can say and recognize that this is an ongoing "cat and mouse game" - and historically, the "cat" (the community) has eventually always caught the "mouse" (the protection schemes)...

The problem now is that the Cat does NOT know if the solution acually IS the solution. The created disks may work for quite some time, only to find that actually the mouse has fooled you.

setarip_old

14th January 2011, 20:48

rotty

14th January 2011, 21:53

Yet again - it's an ONGOING game...

Instead of trying to pick out one sentence out of context (as you've now done two or three times) to "support" your defeatist attitude, I'd suggest you appreciate them as parts of the overall context of the postings in which they appear.

Yet again, without comparing the nature of types of protection, we are all still smiling about the alleged invulnerability of AACS and BD+.

Cinavia is not the end all and be all, just a stumbling block on the road...

Who said it was the end of the road. And why on earth the attitude, a little over sensitive.

Reading your last post anyone would believe I had attacked you or your views which I have not.

I picked out that sentence because that was the one I felt was relevant, simple as that. The whole of your text is there for all to see in your post.

I am certainly not defeatist. I am a realist, and I am also an optimist.

So to backup your view that I am defeatist, let’s see where we are 1 year from here, (coasters n all).

derbeDeus

15th January 2011, 00:59

Yes, it's important, as "Rotty" has pointed out, that obviously, a solution that does not incorporate the BDMV disc standard is not a permanent solution.
...
Prognostications regarding these non-BDMV Blu-rays becoming coasters are likely correct

Two things to point here: there are two main standards here:
BDMV and BDAV. Anything else belongs to one of them. For instance AVCHD is a BDMV sort, AVCREC too. BDMV-rec is just a made up name, it's nowhere else to be found and I guess it simply tells BDMV on a recordable disc.

The other thing is that if sony&co decides to ban it, they simply throw away a part of the AACS standard, the one referring to recordable BDMV.

setarip_old

15th January 2011, 02:01

let’s see where we are 1 year from hereUndoubtedly several (solved) iterations of Cinavia further along than we are today...

Ghitulescu

15th January 2011, 07:38

The other thing is that if sony&co decides to ban it, they simply throw away a part of the AACS standard, the one referring to recordable BDMV.

Try not to forget that Matsushita is also involved in this game.

Anyway, as I said, the BD specs are continuously evolving, which defeats the purpose of a standard :p.

rotty

15th January 2011, 13:53

Undoubtedly several (solved) iterations of Cinavia further along than we are today...

Absolutely, im sure your right, many.

What I was saying was just caution, where as before, if a new encryption came out, when the disks were cracked, the created burned disks were safe, i.e. the created disk would always work.

The protection was encryption or corruption, and you know if you have been successful in removal of that.

Audio watermarking is different, you don’t want to remove the audio as you did with encryption. Digital stream marking along with many analogue types of marking are available, many of which could and probably are employed on these watermarked disks.

So what does this mean, well players right now may have f/w setup for perhaps one or two watermark types even though they are capable of detecting all of them.

So these new backup disks we have made and work fine could still contain marks we did not know about, we need the audio so we have inadvertently passed on the unknown marks. Unknown because they did not trigger the players on this f/w version.

This would be the first time in the history of video media where our known working backup collection could become useless at a future date. (Excluding longevity of course).

Please don’t think im defeatist, I have taken in what you and other people are saying, its just that we should be very cautious this time, it is different.

derbeDeus

15th January 2011, 15:50

So what does this mean, well players right now may have f/w setup for perhaps one or two watermark types even though they are capable of detecting all of them.

So these new backup disks we have made and work fine could still contain marks we did not know about, we need the audio so we have inadvertently passed on the unknown marks. Unknown because they did not trigger the players on this f/w version.

What you are talking about here applies to the case when Cinavia watermark is removed, not disabled. Indeed I've read that bit too (iirc, in a patent) that the watermark detector in a player will detect only whatever matches its stego key. And a removal tool based on a single player will likely remove it only partially. Yes, that makes sense, but is not the case here.

These kind of backups have Cinavia disabled for the same reason it is disabled on the original discs.

rotty

15th January 2011, 16:12

What you are talking about here applies to the case when Cinavia watermark is removed, not disabled. Indeed I've read that bit too (iirc, in a patent) that the watermark detector in a player will detect only whatever matches its stego key. And a removal tool based on a single player will likely remove it only partially. Yes, that makes sense, but is not the case here.

These kind of backups have Cinavia disabled for the same reason it is disabled on the original discs.

Hi derbeDeus

It will be interesting if our friends in the encryption removal buisness(s) place a warning "may still contain nuts" lol, on the s/w, i.e. may still contain watermarks (unknowable at this time).

I expect Peer will put us right and I hope we are wrong on this, and put to rest our fears.

setarip_old

15th January 2011, 23:22

It's my opinion that it's shortsighted to ignore the tremendously significant fact that the PS3 has been hacked, "including its Blu-ray and PS3 keys" - purportedly irreversibly. At least for now, as well as other things "non-Cinavia", this appears to blast open the door (with no way for SONY to close it for the time being) to exploration and cirumvention of "everything Cinavia" contained in the bowels of the PS3 - whether currently activated or "sleeper"/"time bomb" in nature. Once obtained and overcome regarding the PS3, it would presumably be a short time until such knowledge would be applied to all pure standalone players as well...

rotty

16th January 2011, 14:02

Yes, the attack on the PS3 is very interesting.

I don’t know, but I have had the impression that Sony don’t seem that bothered if the PS3 looses the ability to play Blu ray disks in favour of their standalone players.

It may be that the next gen of disks need an update to all players (not necessarily anything to do with Cinavia) to play the new disks. This update would NOT be available to the PS3. Only a guess.

As for back engineering, well not all Cinavia/other Audio watermark algorithm/program implementations will be in flash, these would have come with updates in the future, so although of some use, and of course interesting, not the whole picture.

So very significant these victories but we must keep our feet on the ground, how much this will impact on other standalones I think we must just see. Here's hoping.

kurkosdr

16th January 2011, 15:52

Don't want to rain on your parade guys, but doesn't the DVD Fab method require that we use the m2ts container and don't do any re-encoding? Having to avoid the use of the mkv container and the re-encoding of the content isn't much of a win IMO.

Why can't we take the DTS track from an NTSC DVD-Video and replace the cinavia marked audio with that? I would do it myself, but I live in Europe, and all DVDs here are 25p, so synchronizing the audio with the 24p bluray image will be hard. But why can't someone from the NTSC part of the world do it?
Please answer...

rotty

16th January 2011, 16:16

I think people have taken the 23.976 f rate audio from DVD and done this. Also the film version would have to be exactly the same to keep audio in sync throught.
I suppose this only has limited time before the watermark(s) are introduced in DVD audio, even if it is just to stop BD backup.

As im sure you know, it is not the real answer.

Ghitulescu

16th January 2011, 16:17

And they could use different cuts, so the audio won't fit anylonger.

Kerry56

16th January 2011, 17:18

...I suppose this only has limited time before the watermark(s) are introduced in DVD audio, even if it is just to stop BD backup.

Takers R1 DVD has already come out with Cinavia. http://forum.slysoft.com/showthread.php?t=41885&page=48

SamuriHL

16th January 2011, 17:22

Takers R1 DVD has already come out with Cinavia. http://forum.slysoft.com/showthread.php?t=41885&page=48

I know that's been said, but, here's a question for anyone who has that disc and has a PS3 or other Cinavia supporting player...If you make a backup of the DVD, let's say with AnyDVD or whatever, burn it to a blank DVD, and attempt to play it, is Cinavia detected? I'm not talking about remastering it. I'm talking about simply removing any protection on the disc and making a full out copy with menus, trailers, and all. So basically (assuming no structural protection which is probably unlikely since most discs use it these days, but, for the sake of argument..) a DVD backup with CSS removed....does the PS3 or another player then bring up a Cinavia message and mute the audio as it does on the BD's that have Cinavia?

setarip_old

16th January 2011, 17:55

does the PS3 or another player then bring up a Cinavia message and mute the audio as it does on the BD's that have Cinavia?That's a very disconcerting possibility, as I believe it wouldn't take significant modification for the Cinavia "package" to check for CSS rather than AACS. If the AACS-LA licensee studios who are also DVDFLLC licensees "buy into it", it could appear on virtually all commercial disc-based movie media.

Of course, depending on the Cinavia-related fixes that, in the near future, result from the recent "irreversible" hack of the PS3, this may or may not prove to be a significant problem.

On the other hand, please note that in this ongoing "cat and mouse game", the Cinavia folks have now been REQUIRED to enhance/modify its payload in response to this community's effort.

SamuriHL

16th January 2011, 18:17

That's a very disconcerting possibility, as I believe it wouldn't take significant modification for the Cinavia "package" to check for CSS rather than AACS. If the AACS-LA member studios "buy into it", it could appear on virtually all commercial disc-based movie media.

Of course, depending on the Cinavia-related fixes that, in the near future, result from the recent "irreversible" hack of the PS3, this may or may not prove to be a significant problem.

On the other hand, please note that in this ongoing "cat and mouse game", the Cinavia folks have now been REQUIRED to enhance/modify its payload in response to this community's effort.

Yea, I wasn't trying to get into the whole cat and mouse discussion, as we know how that's going to go. My curiosity surrounds whether or not a backup trips it. The reason I ask is that when I took The Losers DTS-HD MA track, converted it to standard DTS, and added it to the _DVD_ version, it DID trip it, but, that may be because it was looking for AACS, not CSS. So, I'm really interested in how a commercial DVD with Cinavia behaves.

setarip_old

16th January 2011, 20:40

I believe the official release date for "The Takers" is this coming Tuesday...

kurkosdr

16th January 2011, 21:55

Takers R1 DVD has already come out with Cinavia. http://forum.slysoft.com/showthread.php?t=41885&page=48
We 're screwed. Once word gets out in hollywood that cinavia does pose a speedbump to the 'pirates', most DVDs would come with it, and new dvd players would be required to have cinavia detection and be firmware upgradeable (so cinavia can be changed). So, even if we manage to get rid of the current version, a new one will appear that will trigger new players made afterwards and players with upgraded firmwares.
If you thing i am exaggerating, let me remind you that this is from the same people who brought us HDCP, protected video path and intel drm.

I see only one solution: Class action lawsuit. You can't advertise "DivxHD playback", "Bluray playback", "Divx playback" and then selectively block some discs from playing. It's false advertising. After all, back ups are still legal, if you do them in a foreign country were anti circumvention doesnt apply and bring the back ups home. If the guys who sued comcast won, then this case can be won too.

If this fails, then our playback devices will be split into the free ones (VLC, Boxee Box, standalone media players without an optical drive) and the non free ones (practically all new dvd/bluray players)

SamuriHL

16th January 2011, 22:07

I believe the official release date for "The Takers" is this coming Tuesday...

Ah, yes, you're correct. With all the reports out there I thought it was out already. My mistake. I guess we'll find out this week the info I'm inquiring about.

SamuriHL

16th January 2011, 22:11

To those worrying about DVD releases getting Cinavia tracks on them, relax. This was not only expected and predicted, we were actually shocked that they released ANY DVD releases of BD movies without it. DVD players are not affected. It's completely to stop people from muxing in a DVD track to a BD release. But, it does bring up the question I asked....if on a Cinavia infected player whether the DVD backup with no CSS will be detected and display the message.

kurkosdr

16th January 2011, 22:40

DVD players are not affected.
Correction: DVD players sold as of today are not affected. If next week cinavia detection becomes a requirement for CSS, then all manufacturers will have to comply, and new dvd players sold since then will be affected.

If you think hollywood won't do it, read my previous post.

Again, i think we must sue. Mainly in the U.S., were it's a big enough market to matter (europe is also big, but each country has it's own laws)

SamuriHL

16th January 2011, 22:58

Um, who's making new models of DVD players??? I can understand BD players that play DVD's being affected, but, an actual stand alone DVD player? I'll hold off on the sky is falling routine for DVD players for now. If and when we see an actual DVD player released that detects Cinavia in non-CSS backups, then we can start to worry.

kurkosdr

16th January 2011, 23:24

Um, who's making new models of DVD players??? I can understand BD players that play DVD's being affected
Even in that case, if Cinavia starts appearing in more DVD releases, and bluray players start to block backup DVDs and Divx avi's, then we wouldn't be able to make backup DVDs anymore that play everywhere. Oh, and cinavia can be added on AC-3 tracks too. It surprises of they haven't done it already.

By the way, has anyone tried to make a DVD Shrink backup of The Takers R1 DVD and play it with the DTS enabled on the PS3? We may be in for a surprise. Or make a divx avi DVD rip, with the sound taken from the DTS track, and play it on the PS3? We might be in for a surprise too.

Same for other cinavia infected players...

SamuriHL

16th January 2011, 23:34

Ok, well, so far it's not even an issue for the majority of people with blu-rays. The PS3 being the biggest device that has Cinavia. I'm only aware of 2 or 3 other players that have Cinavia at all. Yes, this list will increase. But so far, Cinavia hasn't been a huge problem except for PS3 owners. It WILL increase in the future. I don't think the DVD releases are going to be the big issue. But, the fact remains, I want someone to test just how "Cinavia protected" they are.

setarip_old

17th January 2011, 01:13

@kurkosdr If next week cinavia detection becomes a requirement for CSS, then all manufacturers will have to comply, and new dvd players sold since then will be affected.Unless something has changed , DVD licensing requirements are governed by "DVDFLLC" (out of Japan) and not "AACS-LA".

If this is still the case, "AACS-LA" cannot legally compel licensees to do anything specifically applicable to standard DVD players or media (What can be accomplished by armtwisting of companies that are licensees of both organizations could be a very different story...)

BTW - You say:bluray players start to block backup DVDs and Divx avi's...DivX - playback capability is itself a LEGALLY LICENSED product, for which the hardware manufacturers have paid good money, because it helps sell units. There'd likely be a raft of suits and countersuits should one licensing entity (AACS-LA) try to convince its licensees to eliminate DivX playback capability.

And,at any point in the future, when the day is done, it will still be the same question - Who's ahead today, in the "Cinavia" game - is it Verance and AACS-LA or is it the community? ;>}

setarip_old

17th January 2011, 01:56

@SamuriHL But, the fact remains, I want someone to test just how "Cinavia protected" they are.Those of us (including me) without "Cinavia-infected" hardware will have to stand on the sidelines again, frustrated, while you (as you did with "The Losers") or others with affected players do the testing and report the results for the benefit of all...

SamuriHL

17th January 2011, 01:59

@SamuriHL Those of us (including me) without "Cinavia-infected" hardware will have to stand on the sidelines again, frustrated, while you (as you did with "The Losers") or others with affected players do the testing and report the results for the benefit of all...

Agreed. I have no interest in buying or renting a DVD, however. And I don't know enough about this particular movie to know if I want to buy it or not. So, like you, I'll have to sit on the sidelines until it comes out and people with a PS3 or other Cinavia infected hardware can report what they find. I just hope that if someone reports on it that they document their full methodology, as I'm sure you'll agree. What programs were used to make the backup, etc.

Ghitulescu

17th January 2011, 09:42

@kurkosdr Unless something has changed , DVD licensing requirements are governed by "DVDFLLC" (out of Japan) and not "AACS-LA".

Which companies belong to each licensing body? :p :rolleyes: :p

xenex

17th January 2011, 10:58

If I can be forgiven for some possible speculation, based on what I have seen in the past, I'd bet that cheap new $99 Chinese-made BD players will (likely) appear within the year.

These will probably flood the market and be brand-named by companies that no one has ever heard of before, with names like "GoWell," "Hotwell," "Desay," "Hualu," "VTREK," and etc...

And I speculate that they will "ostensibly" support Cinavia, but someone will soon find them to have a "hidden" menu command, like "press EJECT,1,2,3,4" and Cinavia will be disabled.

Not intentionally, of course, it was just something the Chinese manufacturers implemented for testing purposes, but "accidentally" forgot to remove.

So, while the people who spend large amounts of money buying "famous-name" "world-brand" gear from SONY, Panasonic, etc., are wondering why their equipment is telling them "Sorry, Dave, I can't do that" the thrifty smart people who buy cheap Chinese gear play whatever they want, wherever they want.

mike20021969

17th January 2011, 11:31

After reading some of the latest posts on here, it seems many people are still assuming Cinavia will never be able to be removed from back-ups.

Ghitulescu

17th January 2011, 11:37

.... it seems many people are still assuming Cinavia will never be able to be removed from back-ups.

Yes, removing a stain from a T-shirt which washes away the original colour is not considered to be a removal.

The best method still remains the prevention of the triggering or its inefficiency (the player would keep playing even after the trigger)

Peer van Heuen

17th January 2011, 12:22

Yes, removing a stain from a T-shirt which washes away the original colour is not considered to be a removal.

So, you're somehow, based on a gut feeling (?), insisting on the impossibility of removing that watermark without destroying or "staining" the actual content.

I don't know how much thought you have really spent on that matter or how qualified you are to give an expertise.
Just this much: it is very plausible, that you can apply a mechanism, that renders the watermark useless, at least without percievably further worstening the quality of the signal.
It is even likely that - depending on the level of sophistication - removal would re-improve the quality, more closely resembling the original.

A watermark consists of either subtraction or modification of existing information or of addition or a combination thereof in a specific way.
Anyone can imagine, that - once you know how a watermark has been applied, you can, to a certain level, work yourself backward again.

It's not quite as simple as reversing
f(x) -> f'(x)
as the watermarking is not neccessarily or even likely a bijective projection and also in many situations certain parts of the original signal already coincidentally resembled parts of the watermark, but if you apply some additional signal processing for statistical prediction, you will very likely be ending up repairing more of the original signal than you will be messing it up.

I'd also like to point out: it has been done before with another audio watermarking scheme. The results were excellent.

The only difference in case of Cinavia is that it may be more difficult to make the removal remain effective for all detection devices.

xenex

17th January 2011, 12:45

I'd also like to point out: it has been done before with another audio watermarking scheme. The results were excellent.

Can you clarify if the "previous work" to which you refer was the Felten (et.al) work on the SDMI watermark challenge in 2000?

http://www.usenix.org/events/sec01/craver.pdf
http://www.cs.princeton.edu/sip/sdmi/faq.html

Ghitulescu

17th January 2011, 12:52

So, you're somehow, based on a gut feeling (?), insisting on the impossibility of removing that watermark without destroying or "staining" the actual content.

I don't know how much thought you have really spent on that matter or how qualified you are to give an expertise.
Just this much: it is very plausible, that you can apply a mechanism, that renders the watermark useless, at least without percievably further worstening the quality of the signal.
It is even likely that - depending on the level of sophistication - removal would re-improve the quality, more closely resembling the original.

A watermark consists of either subtraction or modification of existing information or of addition or a combination thereof in a specific way.
Anyone can imagine, that - once you know how a watermark has been applied, you can, to a certain level, work yourself backward again.

It's not quite as simple as reversing
f(x) -> f'(x)
as the watermarking is not neccessarily or even likely a bijective projection and also in many situations certain parts of the original signal already coincidentally resembled parts of the watermark, but if you apply some additional signal processing for statistical prediction, you will very likely be ending up repairing more of the original signal than you will be messing it up.

I'd also like to point out: it has been done before with another audio watermarking scheme. The results were excellent.

The only difference in case of Cinavia is that it may be more difficult to make the removal remain effective for all detection devices.

You confirmed my assertions: see the red passages.
I spent no minute in decompiling cinavia - I studied their patents instead, and the watermarking they do is not reversible, not in the 1:1 form anyway, even if one knows the functions.

I am also a bit familiar with various audio filters and methods used in music.

Instead of a "decinavied" HD audio I would prefer an "honest" DD/DTS 5.1. Otherwise we would be in the same situation as few years ago, when SCMS and CSS protections were "circumvented (:p)" via analog loophole (cdplayer -> chinch cables -> cdrecorder/soundcard; dvdplayer -> chinch cables -> dvdrecorder/tvcard) and macrovision was defeated via external boxes, which at that time more damaged the signal than removed the distortions. I don't think this is THE solution. The best solution is NOT to have it, originally. The second best one is to render the player immune.

It's the 1:1 digital copy the studios want to fight, and this is for now rendered moot.

Besides, adding cinavia to a "pure" sound is counterproductive on the long term, as shown by other watermarking systems (like the CBS Copycode) and the fact that DVD-audio never left its blockstarts. Pure sound is aimed at audiophiles, people that have already thousands of $/£/€ on their equipment, only to hear the cinavia artefacts. It doesn't affect regular people with normal setups. And it's a PITA for all that use backups to save their originals.

GodofaGap

17th January 2011, 13:02

Pure sound is aimed at audiophiles, people that have already thousands of $/£/€ on their equipment, only to hear the cinavia artefacts.
People don't hear Cinavia artifacts. If Cinavia was that easy to detect it could also be that easily scrambled.

Ghitulescu

17th January 2011, 13:39

One can easily spot a stain on a T-shirt, its removal seems to be more difficult, right? :p

Secondly, the better (and more expensive) a device is, the easier is to spot defects in the source. The cheap toys "level" the quality.

I had some time ago a controversy about the quality of the video output of a certain player. Everyone was outraged and I simply could not see the error. I know how to recognise the defects, I simply couldn't find that "outrageous" one. My fault was that I looked for an outrageous effect, while it was a simple line doubling, twice on the screen (like the trinitron issue). Two extra lines out of 1080 made those people cry out so loud. These lines could be spotted only using test patterns (or oversharped LCD-TVs, especially those HDready which amplify it by upscaling). However, once discovered, I saw them the lines every time.

Once cinavia will be more aggressive, it cannot be tolerated anymore, especially by those that have paid premium prices for gear and for media, and thus they expect premium quality too.

If I don't care about the quality I paid for, I see no problem in removing cinavia the "hard way". But I do care, and I see a problem in having it already.

Peer van Heuen

17th January 2011, 13:52

The second best one is to render the player immune.

...and that is the part, I'm strongly objecting to.
It's what I was trying to explain, I'll put some numbers to it to simplify:

If the quality of the original is 100% and the quality after applying Cinavia is 99%, my personal "gut feeling" is that you CAN remove Cinavia in a way that you'll end up somewhere between 99% and 100%.

So in no way do I believe, that leaving Cinavia intact will result in better quality than removing that stink (not that I believe anyone would be able to tell the difference either way).

But even if you drop down to 98% by removing Cinavia, I would absolutely, definitely, no doubt prefer it to any method that retains the junk in the material but just suppresses the detection.
Because that material (that I've paid for) still comes with a flaw that might strike me later on when I decide to transfer it to my you-name-the-device I want to enjoy it on.

xenex

17th January 2011, 13:59

GodofaGap

17th January 2011, 14:19

One can easily spot a stain on a T-shirt, its removal seems to be more difficult, right? :p
I'm not talking about removal, I'm talking about scrambling. And yes, it's not too difficult to paint a blue spot red. :p

Of course your whole analogy fals apart since I haven't read anything reliable about *hearing* Cinavia so far. Also not from those with "high quality" gear.

rotty

17th January 2011, 14:30

I'm not talking about removal, I'm talking about scrambling. And yes, it's not too difficult to paint a blue spot red. :p

Of course your whole analogy fals apart since I haven't read anything reliable about *hearing* Cinavia so far. Also not from those with "high quality" gear.

Hi GodofaGap

Its sort of like this, if is say a sentence "I'm off to the park" and someone alters it and you hear "I'm going to the park" you dont see anything wrong with it at all, its fine, UNTIL you hear what was actually said, then you see the difference.

Cinavia is sort of like that, if you took say a 5 second clip of audio that had the watermark and played it, it would most likely sound ok, if you heard the same clip without the watermark and played them one after the other you probably would hear a difference, probably not massive but a difference.

Its the fact that the audio has been bastardised that is wrong and we shouldnt have to have that on so called true hi-fi audio.

Ghitulescu

17th January 2011, 14:42

Since Cinavia has now been blocking "Camcorder-Recordings" in cinemas for at LEAST a year now, it has obviously been present in the Cinema audio for at least that long, and no one has noticed, or complained about the audio quality. Hmm....
Do I need to comment on this? :p:p:p:p:p:p:p
I was talking about subtle differences, not about butchered quality.

I'm not talking about removal, I'm talking about scrambling. And yes, it's not too difficult to paint a blue spot red. :p
But you have to know first that it was RED! And this info is missing. Your brain can deduct some things using various patterns and some past experiences, but not a software. Not today.
Of course your whole analogy fals apart since I haven't read anything reliable about *hearing* Cinavia so far. Also not from those with "high quality" gear.

There are 5 movies so far, so the impact of cinavia is extremely low (keep it this way please :)). Some of them do have a presence around 15kHz which should be detectable by most people, provided the gear has the required bandwidth.

My example should demonstrate that once one knows what to look for s/he would always recognise it.

Again I am talking about 100% recovery of the original signal. It is not possible. However, Peer is right saying that removal algorithms could be developed in order to reach an excellent result.

Once again, to avoid any confusions and misinterpretations:

if one defines quality by employing terms like camcorder-recordings, we are definitely not talking about the same thing.

I am talking about the 100% accurate obtention of the original recording. The failure to do so means [at least] for me the useless of the HD audio, the purpose of HD audio, as defined and marketed by the content producers, is therefore defeated. With or wothout cinavia I will always end, be it original or copy, with something that may sound brilliant, but it's not what I've paid for - I've paid for unaltered studio quality, as advertised.

But in the end, I think this should be path to be followed -> http://forum.doom9.org/showpost.php?p=1455339&postcount=281.

mike20021969

17th January 2011, 15:01

I've paid for unaltered studio qualityYou might think you have. as advertisedWhere?

GodofaGap

17th January 2011, 15:21

Its sort of like this, if is say a sentence "I'm off to the park" and someone alters it and you hear "I'm going to the park" you dont see anything wrong with it at all, its fine, UNTIL you hear what was actually said, then you see the difference.
There is a well known auditory effect that is called masking.

But you have to know first that it was RED!
Perhaps there is a language barrier here. Scrambling is not restoring the original signal. It is randomizing a signal so that it becomes unrecognizable to pick up for something that it is not aware of the scrambling process. Cinavia in the end is nothing more than a coherent signal that can be picked up, and therefor it can also be scrambled.

This scrambling may result in audible loss, but we can't know now.

There are 5 movies so far, so the impact of cinavia is extremely low (keep it this way please :)). Some of them do have a presence around 15kHz which should be detectable by most people, provided the gear has the required bandwidth.

My example should demonstrate that once one knows what to look for s/he would always recognise it.
This is nonsense. Just because something is in the audible frequency range, it does not mean that it is audible even with the best gear available. There is more than one component to making something audible.

Also, the Cinavia must be present in much lower frequencies than that, otherwise eliminating it would be rather trivial with a low-pass.

I am talking about the 100% accurate obtention of the original recording. The failure to do so means [at least] for me the useless of the HD audio, the purpose of HD audio, as defined and marketed by the content producers, is therefore defeated. With or wothout cinavia I will always end, be it original or copy, with something that may sound brilliant, but it's not what I've paid for - I've paid for unaltered studio quality, as advertised.
That does not exist. At best you are listening to the interpretation of an audio engineer/mixer obfuscated by the particular acoustics of your room.

Ghitulescu

17th January 2011, 16:37

That does not exist. At best you are listening to the interpretation of an audio engineer/mixer obfuscated by the particular acoustics of your room.

Yes, there's a language barrier. I get what you say on non-cinavied recordings. What I meant happens afterwards. After "cinaviation" I get even less.

Concerning advertising, I really don't think you're so blind that do not see all the fuzz around HDTV & stuff. The BD must have something to stand out against the DVD.

jdobbs

17th January 2011, 17:31

...and that is the part, I'm strongly objecting to.
It's what I was trying to explain, I'll put some numbers to it to simplify:

If the quality of the original is 100% and the quality after applying Cinavia is 99%, my personal "gut feeling" is that you CAN remove Cinavia in a way that you'll end up somewhere between 99% and 100%.

So in no way do I believe, that leaving Cinavia intact will result in better quality than removing that stink (not that I believe anyone would be able to tell the difference either way).

But even if you drop down to 98% by removing Cinavia, I would absolutely, definitely, no doubt prefer it to any method that retains the junk in the material but just suppresses the detection.
Because that material (that I've paid for) still comes with a flaw that might strike me later on when I decide to transfer it to my you-name-the-device I want to enjoy it on. I completely agree with that. Firmware fixes or alternate disc formatting are at best a temporary workaround -- never a solution.

mike20021969

17th January 2011, 18:38

The BD must have something to stand out against the DVD.Picture quality, apparently.

setarip_old

17th January 2011, 20:02

@Peer van Heuen But even if you drop down to 98% by removing Cinavia, I would absolutely, definitely, no doubt prefer it to any method that retains the junk in the material but just suppresses the detection.
Because that material (that I've paid for) still comes with a flaw that might strike me later on when I decide to transfer it to my you-name-the-device I want to enjoy it on.
I'd suggest that there are/should be two different objectives regarding overcoming the effects of Cinavia:

1) Long-term - As you propose, to devise a method that will REMOVE the watermarking from any and all Cinavia "infected" discs.

2) Short-term, the sooner the better - To devise a method that will prevent Cinavia from being activated when any and all Cinavia "infected" discs are played.

This short term solution would address the needs of the masses, in that no one making a legitimate backup copy would be confronted with a Cinavia-crippled disc. Such quick responses should also make it apparent to AACS-LA members and Verance that the Blu-ray business model's profit margin is actually being eroded by the cost of the application of Cinavia.

At the same time then, some of those truly knowledgable community members could remain focussed on the long-term goal of purging the watermarks from any and all discs.

rotty

17th January 2011, 21:41

The point that Setarip metions, "profits being eroded" for the cost to studios employing Cinavia to their releases.

This you would think would be the most powerfull point of.

It is sound logic.

The studios dont seem to have any logic at all, they are still paying high costs to have BD+ / AACS on their disks EVEN when they know full well there is no point. Especially with versions that are well and truly useless.

Would any of you pay a Company for the protection on your disk when you know it NOT doing that at all. I think theres a legal phrase for that eh.

I mean, with Slysoft we have an "on the fly" removal, we dont even have to strip it first.

I dont think I will ever understand the basic economics of this.

jdobbs

17th January 2011, 21:41

JMHO, but I think the effort should be concentrated on the long-term solution. Right now the number of discs that use Cinavia aren't enough to really care -- so why make a temporary solution for such a small base. I'd rather wait for the true solution. In the meantime, just backup your discs with it -- and when the solution comes along, you can just strip the Cinavia and rewrite them.

rotty

17th January 2011, 21:50

SamuriHL

17th January 2011, 22:59

Yup. I agree with jdobbs. The short term is pointless other than for academic reasons. If we were talking a majority of discs then it might make sense, but, for what, 5 so far? And really only one big player that supports it? Focus on getting rid of the darn thing from the tracks. What worries me is that that probably means re-encoding. That to me is a bigger issue than leaving it there and using a non-Cinavia player, but, that is very much a personal choice. The reason I say that though is that there is no way to leave it in the format it started in. If you have to decode the audio in order to remove the Cinavia crap, there's no way to re-encode it so even if there was some theoretical process that allowed perfect decoding, stripping, and re-encoding (there's not), there's no OSS DTS-HD MA DECODER much less ENCODER. I know TrueHD can be decoded but not sure about encoding on that one. So you're left with LPCM assuming you can decode it in full HD in the first place. So there are more hurdles to be solved than just the cough cough "basics" of removing Cinavia from the audio track. That's why the focus should be on the bigger problem of removing it completely rather than "hackarounds" that can be closed off with updates to the Cinavia detection or implementation. Again, just an opinion, but, I'd rather see a SOLUTION than workarounds. At least until there's a critical mass of titles and players that support it.

setarip_old

17th January 2011, 23:31

@jdobbs Right now the number of discs that use Cinavia aren't enough to really care -- so why make a temporary solution for such a small base.The short term solution serves a dual purpose - only one of which has to do with the present small user and product bases affected by Cinavia.

The far more important second purpose is to make it clear to Verance and AACS-LA that Cinavia, will be successfully challenged every step of the way, with every new iteration, so that extending its application to more disc releases and more hardware will have no negative impact on legitimate users - right up until the date the long term solution is at hand.

(With regard to how many or few users are affected by Cinavia - There's nothing to prevent the studios from having Cinavia applied to a whole slew of releases in a very short timespan, thereby immediately upping the ante, especially regarding PS3 owners with [unfortunately] updated firmware)

As a side note, to this very day, (to the best of my knowledge) BD+ has only appeared on Fox Blu-ray releases - and not ALL such releases at that. Yet it was addressed (rightfully) immediately - and continues to be addressed on a release-by-release basis...

In the meantime, just backup your discs with it -- and when the solution comes along, you can just strip the Cinavia and rewrite them.
So that for an indefinite period of time, you'd HAVE to play your originals, thus totally losing the purpose and benefit of making a legitimate backup.

SamuriHL

17th January 2011, 23:47

The far more important second purpose is to make it clear to Verance and AACS-LA that Cinavia, will be successfully challenged every step of the way, with every new iteration, so that extending its application to more disc releases and more hardware will have no negative impact on legitimate users - right up until the date the long term solution is at hand.

While this is true, the issue is that if the people who can defeat this crap permenantly spend all their time on short term solutions, it could take time away from them coming up with the permanent solution. That I think is the valid concern.

As a side note, to this very day, (to the best of my knowledge) BD+ has only appeared on Fox Blu-ray releases - and not ALL such releases at that. Yet it was addressed (rightfully) immediately - and continues to be addressed on a release-by-release basis...

BD+ was supported by *ALL* blu-ray players, however, not just a couple. That's the difference...it affected far more people. And you'll note that it took a huge effort for the first BD+ titles to get defeated. And the solution wasn't a workaround or short term solution. It was a solution that removed it permanently. So the analogy only serves to prove the point of a long term solution, not a short term one. ;)

rotty

18th January 2011, 00:09

As a side note, to this very day, (to the best of my knowledge) BD+ has only appeared on Fox Blu-ray releases - and not ALL such releases at that. Yet it was addressed (rightfully) immediately - and continues to be addressed on a release-by-release basis...

With BD+ release by release basis was fine, a new version of BD+ did NOT affect BD-R disks we had already created and burned from previous versions and stripped of BD+.

If we deal with Cinavia in that way then we may have deliberate inert (sleeping) watermark(s) we didn’t know were there on BD-R disk we have already burned, i.e. sleeping because players with current f/w are not enabled to take notice of them.

Then with the next release (or even a few releases down the line) of Cinavia f/w, players are enabled to detect the inert watermarks we didn’t even know were there, the previous burned BD-R's will now fail to play with the new release of f/w.

We have to have, as far as possible a complete solution before anyone can safely start burning optical media.

Not the same as with BD+ or AACS.

Watermarking is completely different to encryption.

setarip_old

18th January 2011, 00:19

@SamuriHLAnd the solution wasn't a workaround or short term solution. It was a solution that removed it permanently.

Huh? No - There continue to be needed updates to deal with ongoing NEW BD+ iterations...

SamuriHL

18th January 2011, 00:46

@SamuriHL

Huh? No - There continue to be needed updates to deal with ongoing NEW BD+ iterations...

I guess you misunderstood. When BD+ is removed from a backup, it's *GONE*. It's not some "work around". There is NO MORE BD+ on the backup at all. That's what I meant. That is far different than a Cinavia backup that's done using some AACS recording hack or messing with the audio settings of a device to break the Cinavia implementation, etc. Even a workaround that involves disabling the detection routines isn't guaranteed to work in the future if they adjust the Cinavia detection routine. On the contrary, the current BD+ removal is a permanent solution that no matter what they do to future implementations of BD+, once it's removed from a backup, it's simply gone. Does that make sense and help explain the difference of what I meant?

18th January 2011, 00:52

1) buy bluray disk
2) rent alternative bluray disk w/ same title (or better you can rent it before you buy)
dump audio tracks to wavs, use AND bitwise operation (to make wav which only have identical bits of both tracks)
if it will be unsucessfull , try other methods of combining audio tracks
in the end you will have new uniq combined audio track
just in case of potentials problems in future you can also backup both original audio tracks (f/w updates)

Elias

18th January 2011, 07:44

am i being overly paranoid, could they put this in the PSP as well?Why wouldn't they? It's only a matter of time. They'll probably do it on the PSP2 as the PSP didn't do so well with the UMD market (and that was all Sony's fault for overpricing the UMD movies).

Watermarking is completely different to encryption.Well, both have the same purpose, don't they?

rotty

18th January 2011, 11:09

Well, both have the same purpose, don't they?

But they are quite different:
One stops you (or tries to stop you) copying.
One wants you to copy it.

The only way that they are the same is that they are systems for copyright protection, but they are completely different approaches and very very different beasts.

derbeDeus

18th January 2011, 11:51

That is far different than a Cinavia backup that's done using some AACS recording hack or messing with the audio settings of a device to break the Cinavia implementation, etc.

It is not an AACS recording hack. Fact. It is an official recording mode, that is well documented. Please read the docs from aacsla site.
Therefore I would not be so sure that is going to be excluded in the next firmware update. It will be like: "well, we don't really trust all the AACS discs"; then what's the point having AACS with all its modes created in the first place? Not to mention that AACS protected backups are created only from original discs. So basically this does what the studios should have done for the users a while ago. (They included the writing mode in the specs, they spec'ed the managed copy too; except they "forgot" to make the implementations, so no one could benefit from them).

I'm surprised that some ppl would rather have no solution at all than something that simply works for the time being! There's no question about the common golden goal of removing the watermark. But since you have no timeframe for that from anyone, I think this is the best fill for the gap, so far. (ie. applies to all the ppl affected, ps3 owners). And the only worrying thing that the backup made today may not work in the future has a very simple solution. Make up your mind first: do you need to backup your disc now? If you're gonna watch/use it in the near future, have a backup - it pays off. If you're gonna keep it on the shelf for now or money is a big issue, then wait till you need it or have something better.

Otoh, there are pros and cons for either solution: while with a protected backup you preserve the original disc as much as possible including lossless tracks (99% quality as Peer put it) and you make a backup in the time of reading one disc and writing another (some OTF recording would be even faster), with the removal solution to the above time you add the overhead due to decoding/re-encoding of audio plus the removal routine + the uncertainty of the removal method. As it was discussed here, they may leave certain watermarks (for which there is no stego key in the wild) in the stream that can be activated later, making those backups useless too... so what will you have then? Also, as you pointed out earlier, there may be a dtshd decoder at some point (open source or using an installed player filter) but will there be a dtshd/truehd encoder, so lossless is bye-byee (LPCM may be to big to fit in some cases, see Salt). So you're looking probably at a 2-4 hours to make a backup, depending on your gear.

Peer van Heuen

18th January 2011, 13:00

It is not an AACS recording hack. Fact. It is an official recording mode, that is well documented.

That is correct, of course, and I don't think SamuriHL meant it that way.

Therefore I would not be so sure that is going to be excluded in the next firmware update.

I'm no so sure about not being so sure about that.
The Cinavia watermark contains to some detail the information on what type of media the protected material is meant to be presented from. I don't know if that actually goes as deep as "not from recordable media" - it is well possible, though.

derbeDeus

18th January 2011, 13:45

The Cinavia watermark contains to some detail the information on what type of media the protected material is meant to be presented from. I don't know if that actually goes as deep as "not from recordable media" - it is well possible, though.

The payload says TRUSTED_SOURCE. That's all. So far TRUSTED_SOURCE means AACS or CSS.

SamuriHL

18th January 2011, 15:45

That is correct, of course, and I don't think SamuriHL meant it that way.

I'm no so sure about not being so sure about that.
The Cinavia watermark contains to some detail the information on what type of media the protected material is meant to be presented from. I don't know if that actually goes as deep as "not from recordable media" - it is well possible, though.

That is EXACTLY why I called it an AACS hack, because I had a feeling that the Cinavia detection routine could be modified to see if it's a recordable disc. If it contains Cinavia, has AACS, and is on a recordable disc, trigger Cinavia. That's not impossible at all. I know AACS recording is part of the spec. As you said, that's not what I meant at all. I call it a hack rather than a "solution" because Cinavia can be tweaked.

As for a TEMPORARY solution, here's one for you guys. For less than the price of all 5 movies that contain it, you can go buy a Cinavia free BD player as your temp solution. It's just as valid a "method" as messing with the audio settings or writing AACS discs that may or may not work in the future.

Personally, and I think I mentioned this before, I back up my stuff to MKV and use MPC-HC/ffdshow/haali/madVR to watch them. Problem solved until Cinavia removal becomes a reality.

SamuriHL

18th January 2011, 15:48

The payload says TRUSTED_SOURCE. That's all. So far TRUSTED_SOURCE means AACS or CSS.

But there is no reason they can't expand on that in a future update. And that's the point. It's not a permanent solution. It's a hack/work around. Which is valid. I'm not saying that shouldn't be done by those who want it. The point I, and others like jdobbs were making, is that those working on a permanent solution shouldn't waste time with work arounds. If a work around is found, great, that's awesome. I'm not discounting that. I'm saying, however, that the main EFFORT should be focusing on a permanent, "get rid of it", solution. That's all.

derbeDeus

18th January 2011, 17:15

As for a TEMPORARY solution, here's one for you guys. For less than the price of all 5 movies that contain it, you can go buy a Cinavia free BD player as your temp solution. It's just as valid a "method" as messing with the audio settings or writing AACS discs that may or may not work in the future.

So 5 blanks would be wasted, but buying another BD Player is cheaper...
The backups would be useless when Cinavia is updated, but the BD player without Cinavia won't be updated at some point to include Cinavia detector...

WHAT?

SamuriHL

18th January 2011, 17:40

So 5 blanks would be wasted, but buying another BD Player is cheaper...
The backups would be useless when Cinavia is updated, but the BD player without Cinavia won't be updated at some point to include Cinavia detector...

WHAT?

SIGH. My post was tongue in cheek. Sort of. If you bought a Cinavia free BD player, you could always play backups so long as you don't update the player. It's not a lot different than making AACS recorded discs. Except there's going to be a lot more discs released which means that eventually the cost of buying a cheap player to play your backups on will end up being cheaper unless a permanent solution is found. Again, I wasn't really suggesting everyone go out and buy a player. Just that it's no more or less valid for defeating Cinavia than the temp solutions out there already. I'm not against temp solutions. I just don't think companies like SlySoft or others should be attempting to come up with short time solutions and instead should focus their time on permenantly removing it. That was my only point.

rotty

18th January 2011, 17:59

Temporary or permanent fix, well one is right now, one is in the future. Whichever you are ok with is right for you.

Obviously there is another incentive for these Companies to come up with a permanent solution and that is to prevent loss of confidence.

If you use their s/w to produce disks and they fail with update then they are not going to enjoy your confidence, not to mention anger from you and the rest of their customers.

setarip_old

18th January 2011, 20:55

you can go buy a Cinavia free BD player as your temp solution.

As I said earlier, the far more important second ("temporary") purpose in responding to each and every revision of Cinavia is to make it clear to Verance and AACS-LA that Cinavia, will be successfully challenged every step of the way, with every new iteration, so that extending its application to more disc releases and more hardware will have no negative impact on legitimate users - right up until the date the long term solution is at hand.

SamuriHL

18th January 2011, 20:59

As I said earlier, the far more important second ("temporary") purpose in responding to each and every revision of Cinavia is to make it clear to Verance and AACS-LA that Cinavia, will be successfully challenged every step of the way, with every new iteration, so that extending its application to more disc releases and more hardware will have no negative impact on legitimate users - right up until the date the long term solution is at hand.

And I have no problem with that as long as the people doing the temp solutions aren't the ones who should be working on a more permanent "let's kill this thing once and for all" soution. That's all we were saying. Temp solutions and workarounds are definitely fine for now. Yes, it will show the AACSLA that their protection attempts are futile and force them to plug the holes. So, I guess the "keep em busy" strategy isn't a bad one. Just so long as the right people are working on the right solutions. :)

Elias

19th January 2011, 02:13

But they are quite different:
One stops you (or tries to stop you) copying.
One wants you to copy it.

The only way that they are the same is that they are systems for copyright protection, but they are completely different approaches and very very different beasts.For what reason does it want you to copy it? In order to track the original source?

These film companies are wasting too much money on all this "copyright" protection.

GodofaGap

19th January 2011, 09:03

For what reason does it want you to copy it? In order to track the original source?
He meant that they want you to copy the Cinavia protection.

The difference is that encryption stops you at the front door, but you won't notice the watermark until you are finished and already wasted your time, money and effort.

xenex

19th January 2011, 10:25

Although I am (personally) not affected by Cinavia, I find it "technically" interesting. So, for those who are interested, I rented "Takers" which I understand to be the first actual DVD (not Blu-Ray) which contains Cinavia. I make a few observations:

* "Takers" DVD is CSS and RCE protected, but has no bad sectors and no apparent Arccos/Ripguard/special-protection at all.

* "Takers" DVD has an "AACS" folder - never seen that before! - which has two files:

AACS->|
|-> CSS_CONTENT_CERT.AACS (76 bytes)
|-> CSS_CONTENT_HASH_TABLE.AACS (116696 bytes)

* Quick Google of these files brought me to this:

http://www.aacsla.com/specifications/AACS_Spec_Signed_CSS_Final_0.951.pdf

So, it appears that the files in the AACS folder consist of one hash table file that hashes the contents of all VOB files on the DVD (in order to determine CSS presence), and a second AES-signed file that authenticates the original hash table file.

I've also read the final AACS agreements, and if I am correct in my reading, which I believe I am, I see the "rules" as:

1> AACS-Licensed devices must always attempt to read the Cinavia watermark from ALL media.
2> If present, the watermark is one of two possible flags - NO_HOME_USE or TRUSTED_SOURCE.
3> If NO_HOME_USE stop play immediately and return Cinavia message 1.
4> If TRUSTED_SOURCE check if it is a trusted source. (Otherwise, return Cinavia message 3.)

Now, on item 4, there is in fact more than one "trusted source." Check the AACS license. For the purposes of Cinavia on DVD, just see this PDF, page 20:

http://bit.ly/fEM8WB

If you can't be bothered to check the link, it says:

*New Signed CSS book defines format for CSS [sic - should be AACS] certificates for use with DVD
*Allows Content Owners to place AACS Watermarks on content which is only protected with CSS
*If an AACS player sees the Trusted Source watermark on an optical disc which does not include the certificate, the player will mute the audio

Hopefully, this was all clear. It's not speculation on my part, it is directly from the AACS specifications. I recommend reading them, it is interesting stuff.

Ghitulescu

19th January 2011, 10:44

As I see it today, since almost every player is manufactured in China, if China refuses to implement them, the content industry would be "somewhere over the rainbow". It would be difficult to say how much time they can hang on ...

setarip_old

19th January 2011, 11:14

@xenex

Hi!

Extremely interesting stuff.

However, I'm curious to know why the second link you provided is to (after redirection) CPTWG.ORG, Copy Protection Technical Working Group that, per CNet, is a committee formed by consumer electronics and computer industry companies to recommend DVD and DTV copy-protection protocols - and the presented information is, in fact, a July 22, 2009 presentation made by AACS to CPTWG.

Is there not a final version of this information available from actual AACS documentation? I ask because things may have changed since 7/22/09...

xenex

19th January 2011, 11:33

@setarip_old

That was the first thing I could quickly find. I also found these:

www.aacsla.com/license/AACS_Adopter_Agrmt_090605.pdf
www.aacsla.com/license/AACS_Content_Provider_Agrmt_090619.pdf
www.aacsla.com/license/AACS_Content_Participant_Agrmt_090605.pdf

But it takes a while to read through this stuff! I'm only human. But I bet you will find what you look for in the above.

rotty

19th January 2011, 11:55

These film companies are wasting too much money on all this "copyright" protection.

They certainly are.

Although, they dont lose out with that cost, we have to pay extra for the disks to cover that.

They DO however loose out greatly on sales numbers because of the higher cost of the disks.

And, ironically, thats what gives the pirates their market.

kurkosdr

19th January 2011, 15:52

The studios dont seem to have any logic at all, they are still paying high costs to have BD+ / AACS on their disks EVEN when they know full well there is no point. Especially with versions that are well and truly useless.

Would any of you pay a Company for the protection on your disk when you know it NOT doing that at all. I think theres a legal phrase for that eh.

If you head over to the sites of the companies that provide such tech (ex macrovision) you won't believe the lies and exaggerations they tell to convince the studios to buy into their tech.

Some i noticed are:

1) It takes a skilled computer user to find a program to defeat ripguard and other structure protection scemes (yeah right)

2) Most devices respect CGMS-A (as regards standalones maybe, but when talking about tv cards no)

3)BD+ is uncrackable

4)It wont cause playback problems, trust us

Since most studio owners are old people who believe computers are some kind of miracle device from planet Vulcan, they buy into everything these companies tell them, and eventualy end up irritating only their legit customers.

Anyway, i think this is going to end up just like Cactus Data Shield. It will turn people away from BD players and entice them to buy dedicated MKV players (like CDS turned people away from cds and towards mp3 players). So, people wont be able to buy any of their content even if they wanted to. And eventually hollywood will understand its pointless to go against your own customers, and release their stuff in mkv, but only after they ve lost millions in the process.

Ghitulescu

19th January 2011, 16:32

The studios dont seem to have any logic at all, they are still paying high costs to have BD+ / AACS on their disks EVEN when they know full well there is no point. Especially with versions that are well and truly useless.

Would any of you pay a Company for the protection on your disk when you know it NOT doing that at all. I think theres a legal phrase for that eh.

The logic is very simple and I sincerely don't think anyone has failed to see it.

The protection needs not to be 100% bulletproof - that is almost impossible to attain and it would cost huge amounts of money to develop and to implement.

The protection needs only to be strong enough that the Average Joe not be able to crack it (at least to survive the attack with normal tools, like Nero & co.). To crack it, Average Joe needs to find a proper tool. Where?

Here comes however the second part - the law. The amis invented the DMCA and lobbied with such a frenzy that we have a similar directive here, too. Under this directive it's simply enough for a DVD to ask a password/PIN (be it 0000) to be considered as a prevention means against unauthorised access, and therefore any software that automatically fills the 0000 for you be banned.

So, by setting a reasonably strong protection and "bending the law", the studios managed to have the control of the user actions.

Why Elby and similar moved to fiscal paradises, while Nero & co suddenly could not copy commercial DVDs? Why doom9 is the only forum I know (in one of the languages I know, seven of them) that still has a sub-forum of decrypting?

This is the logic.

xenex

19th January 2011, 16:35

I don't want to get off-topic, but one thing I have noticed is that the new "Takers" DVD (and most new DVD's) no longer contain the old analog protection previously just known as "Macrovision."

I suppose the studios feel that people making VHS tape copies of DVDs are now largely just an anachronism and no longer a threat. From what I have noticed, this old protection is becoming less and less common on newly released DVDs.

Ghitulescu

19th January 2011, 17:17

To answer this slightly off-topic observation:

AFAIK JVC, the last manufacturer, officially withdrew its support for VHS and any flavour of it at the end of 2008. VHS gear is no longer manufactured. Neither its media. And in 2012 most if not all analog connections (and signals) will become history, too.

So, why paying royalties to Macrovision any longer?

rotty

19th January 2011, 19:07

Since most studio owners are old people who believe computers are some kind of miracle device from planet Vulcan, they buy into everything these companies tell them, and eventualy end up irritating only their legit customers.

Hi kurkosdr

You would think that some bright spark younger Executive at the studio(s) would walk into the board room with a laptop with AnyDVD running, put a Blu Ray disk from their studio with the extreemly expensive "uncrackable" protection on it into the drive and say "the files im now showing you are completely unprotected, all I have had to do is put the disk in the drive, its all done for me"

Surely that has been done in the studios at some point, its been going on from DVD days.

It was more complicated to remove Macrovision from VHS, you dont need to do anything yourself with disk media and its gone.

Just put the disk in the drive, are they saying that that is beyond Joe Average.

It must be they dont want to admit defeat, and the fact as I said before that it is driving up the price of the disk to us and actually fueling piracy.

setarip_old

19th January 2011, 20:01

I, for one, would like to thank "fengtao" and the DVDFab crew for making the effort to provide intermediate Cinavia-related solutions that, when coupled with the hack of the PS3, surely require the Verance/AACS to veer off track in their effort to provide the movie/video industry with the "perfect protection solution".

Several months ago, it was observed in this thread and elsewhere that substituting the DVD audio track for the original audio track of a Cinavia-modified Blu-ray disc is a viable concept.

With the release of "The Takers" watermarked DVD, it is apparent that Verance felt compelled to redirect at least some of its assets to addressing this capability.

I have little doubt that Verance will, likewise, be compelled to address this initial professional "non-removal solution" - that I hope is part of an ongoing "tit-for-tat" response regarding Cinavia.

Again, rather than giving short shrift to this "fengtao"/DVDFab discovery and intermediate fix, I congratulate them for making the effort ;>}
Based on the recent postings to this thread, it's my opinion that the confirmed hacking of the PS3 (SONY is suing "GeoHot" for having successfully done this) is not being fully appreciated for its potential impact in the effort to overcome Cinavia...

SamuriHL

19th January 2011, 20:08

With the release of "The Takers" watermarked DVD, it is apparent that Verance felt compelled to redirect at least some of its assets to addressing this capability.

I thought that, too, until someone pointed out that Cinavia on DVD was always part of the spec. This disc is simply the first implementation of an already existing spec. They didn't have to redirect anything. They simply had to use what was already available and implement it. So, the tit-for-tat that you're looking for has yet to materialize. The ball is in Verance's court to respond to the aforementioned approach that DVDFab took and the known audio settings workaround on the PS3. We shall see what, if anything, they do about it now. :)

EDIT: I know you like when people quote their sources. :)

http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?p=1472584#post1472584

That's one of the places I read that Cinavia on DVD was part of the spec.

setarip_old

19th January 2011, 20:39

DrinkLyeAndDie

19th January 2011, 21:54

Whether part of an existing spec or not, it didn't have to be implemented until now - and implementation requires the concerted effort of AACS-LA as an organization, Verance, fabrication plants, the individual studio(s) chosen to or choosing to float the trial balloon of this additional effort to stymie legitimate purchasers' ability to make a backup copy of a disc. This certainly qualifies as a redirection of at least some assets...

Given the infinitesimally small number of Cinavia titles I can't see that they redirected anything. It's in the specs for Cinavia on DVD and they decided to implement it with the Takers DVD release. If not this release then when? There always has to be a first time for anything. It was intended from the beginning and as standalone DVD players die off and and more standalone Blu-Ray players are manufactured that do support Cinavia then the industry in theory has the bases covered to hinder piracy for both DVDs and Blu-Ray using the same technology. DVDs won't be disappearing anytime soon.

Now we just have to wait until someone finds a real complete and permanent long-term Cinavia removal solution.

dirio49

19th January 2011, 22:54

setarip_old

19th January 2011, 23:22

If not this release then when? There always has to be a first time for anything.Thank you for reinforcing my point ;>}

I'd suggest to you that it wasn't until DVD-to-Blu-ray audiostream switching was confirmed to be a valid and working concept that the Verance/AACS-LA consortium deemed it necessary to actually implement this second stage "fix" to their "perfect solution". Until the determination that switching audiostreams was a functional solution, there was no reason for it to be activated. Therefore, this represents the first example of Verance/AACS-LA being compelled to react/respond to the users in this, the most recent copy protection "cat and mouse game".

If, in fact, any protection-defeating software company has chosen to commit its resources solely to finding "a real complete and permanent long-term Cinavia removal solution", that is certainly that company's prerogative - and the sooner it's developed, the better. However, I sincerely believe that until such developments, it's extremely shortsighted to allow this protection to continue unfettered, as doing so may convince the consortium that now's the time for a widespread application of Cinavia to many, many new releases. If nothing else, short term solutions will make it obvious that this is not and will not be the case.

SamuriHL

19th January 2011, 23:23

Curious.
So do the studious with watermarking DVDs
have also messed up coping dvd for us in the end.
or at least you cannot shrink the dvd. you can only have a 1:1 copy, because of the hash check.

what do you guys think?

later

Can't even have that. The hash is done against each VOB with CSS applied to it. Once you remove it, even a full backup isn't going to help. Obviously this only affects playback on a Cinavia infected device, but yes, this does indeed affect DVD backups now, as well.

SamuriHL

19th January 2011, 23:27

Thank you for reinforcing my point ;>}

I'd suggest to you that it wasn't until DVD-to-Blu-ray audiostream switching was confirmed to be a valid and working concept that the Verance/AACS-LA consortium deemed it necessary to actually implement this second stage "fix" to their "perfect solution". Until the determination that switching audiostreams was a functional solution, there was no reason for it to be activated. Therefore, this represents the first example of Verance/AACS-LA being compelled to react/respond to the users in this, the most recent copy protection "cat and mouse game".

If, in fact, any protection-defeating software company has chosen to commit its resources solely to finding "a real complete and permanent long-term Cinavia removal solution", that is certainly that company's prerogative - and the sooner it's developed, the better. However, I sincerely believe that until such developments, it's extremely shortsighted to allow this protection to continue unfettered, as doing so may convince the consortium that now's the time for a widespread application of Cinavia to many, many new releases. If nothing else, short term solutions will make it obvious that this is not and will not be the case.

You're welcome, then, as I was the one who authored the DVD track from The Losers into a BD-R/E backup and confirmed there was no Cinavia detection. :D However, the inverse also worked, which is scary. Meaning, taking the BD's DTS core track, and adding it to the DVD in place of the AC3 track triggered Cinavia. So, any media that contains a Cinavia audio track *MUST* have a valid corresponding AACS hash. DVD, BD, etc. Matters not as long as the AACS hash is there. Good times.

setarip_old

20th January 2011, 00:07

@SamuriHL You're welcome, then...In my post #618 I quoted "DrinkLyeAndDye's" post #616. How could you possibly think I was thanking you for reinforcing my point? (Perhaps we're both taking reading lessons from the same place ;>})

SamuriHL

20th January 2011, 00:27

@SamuriHL In my post #618 I quoted "DrinkLyeAndDye's" post #616. How could you possibly think I was thanking you for reinforcing my point? (Perhaps we're both taking reading lessons from the same place ;>})

I know you weren't. But you should, since I did an insane amount of testing on The Losers when it first came out. Including taking the DVD audio track and verifying that it could be used perfectly well with the BD image. You're suggesting that those tests are what got Verance to start protecting DVD's. So, again, I say, you're welcome. :)

mike20021969

20th January 2011, 00:47

I've been reading the latest posts here, and cannot keep track of the scores at all.
Who's winning?? :rolleyes:

SamuriHL

20th January 2011, 00:49

I've been reading the latest posts here, and cannot keep track of the scores at all.
Who's winning?? :rolleyes:

Verance. :D Unless, of course, you don't own any of the discs that they put their stuff on and/or a player that cares. :D

setarip_old

20th January 2011, 01:53

@SamuriHL I know you weren't. But you should, since I did an insane amount of testing on The Losers when it first came out.

The only title that the portion of Post #616 I quoted and my Post #618 refer specifically to the "Takers" BD and DVD releases.

Your earlier efforts regarding "The Losers" have no doubt been noted by those who comprise the more than 77,000 views of this thread.

SamuriHL

20th January 2011, 02:05

@SamuriHL

The only title that the portion of Post #616 I quoted and my Post #618 refer specifically to the "Takers" BD and DVD releases.

Your earlier efforts regarding "The Losers" have no doubt been noted by those who comprise the more than 77,000 views of this thread.

Yes I realize that. However, you said this:

I'd suggest to you that it wasn't until DVD-to-Blu-ray audiostream switching was confirmed to be a valid and working concept that the Verance/AACS-LA consortium deemed it necessary to actually implement this second stage "fix" to their "perfect solution". Until the determination that switching audiostreams was a functional solution, there was no reason for it to be activated. Therefore, this represents the first example of Verance/AACS-LA being compelled to react/respond to the users in this, the most recent copy protection "cat and mouse game".

Clearly what I bolded did not refer to the Takers DVD and/or Blu-ray. It must be referencing the earlier efforts on discs such as The Losers. And that's what my comment of "you're welcome" was in reference to. :)

A.VOID

20th January 2011, 03:22

Can an encode contain a flag to tell the player
"TRUSTED_SOURCE"?

SamuriHL

20th January 2011, 03:26

Can an encode contain a flag to tell the player
"TRUSTED_SOURCE"?

No. TRUSTED_SOURCE is only meaningful to the Cinavia checking routine. It means it has a valid AACS certificate. Which a backup won't have.

A.VOID

20th January 2011, 03:34

No. TRUSTED_SOURCE is only meaningful to the Cinavia checking routine. It means it has a valid AACS certificate. Which a backup won't have.

I understand that, but I was suggesting this as a workaround/ solution.
Can we write the TRUSTED_SOURCE flag into the encode?

SamuriHL

20th January 2011, 03:37

I understand that, but I was suggesting this as a workaround/ solution.
Can we write the TRUSTED_SOURCE flag into the encode?

No, clearly you don't. It's not ANYTHING that's part of the encode AT ALL. It's something the Cinavia code sets internally based on what it finds on the disc after doing several AACS checks.

xenex

20th January 2011, 04:28

Mug Funky

20th January 2011, 07:49

it is driving up the price of the disk to us and actually fueling piracy.

well... actually... as far as has been determined (apologies for not providing the link, but it can be found in this thread), the only information we've got from industry people working with this is that at least at one point the watermark can be applied during the sound mix stage. this is in post-production, and long before it hits the DVD studio and any audio encoders.

in this case, it would clearly be a producer's decision to put the protection in.

this means the cost will not be passed to the consumer. if there's any additional costs, it will be to the DVD distributor who license the film from the studios. in order to remain competitive, they will not change the price of their discs - they'll just spend a bit less time making nice menus and fancy functions. or if the licensing cost hasn't changed at all, then there'll be no additional cost (indeed, companies like Sony have licensing sort of vertically integrated as they author their own titles).

implementation requires the concerted effort of AACS-LA as an organization, Verance, fabrication plants,...

there's no conspiracy here. all that's required is a trivial change to the authoring workflow. the uncompressed audio will arrive with cinavia already burnt into it, and the extra AACS folder just means the disc is mastered with DVD Data (they are just files like any other). replicators will pass a master with this, though they potentially could flag it with the authoring house ("hey, guys, there's an extra folder here... just go ahead and master it?... okay").

it helps that all these stages, at least at Sony, are under the same company. i await a time when i'm asked to learn some extra crap because a licensor wants the illusion of a little more safety. so far it hasn't happened yet for BD or DVD, but on the BD front it's quite possible that it could slip through the net unnoticed if it's already in the audio and our testing stations don't respond (i can see the PS3 test triggering cinavia unless we were to compromise that unit, but then it'd be useless as a testing machine).

as far as cinavia appearing on DVDs, it could well be because the DVD usually comes from the same master as the BD.

it may in fact be that the AACS folder is not an attempt to break copying, but in fact an attempt to not break playback on a cinavia equipped device. if a player finds cinavia on a DVD with no hashtable, it must stop playback. otherwise removing it from an infected disc would be as easy as not burning that extra folder.

if that's the case, i'll get back to you when the first one rolls in the door and the nervous phonecalls start. i would hate to forget the last step where i use some NDA'd program to generate the AACS folder, and as a consequence thousands of discs have to be recalled and shredded because they wont play.

with a little luck, cinavia will be confined to studio titles and not indie titles. if this is the case, there could be legal ramifications for the studios - if small distributors are locked out of potential business unless we buy an unnecessary program from them under NDA, or have to "upgrade" our authoring software (and re-train staff or buy new machines even), then that is clearly anti-competitive and probably illegal.

tl;dr - if this trickle becomes a flood, shit's gonna get real in the business world as well as with consumers.

[edit]

just thinking... the hashtable would probably use the CSS keys that are pressed into a separate physical part of the disc (DVD-R's don't have them). this means it would have to be generated at the glass-mastering stage, after scrambling.

this means that even if it's reverse-engineered and new hashtables are created, the disc will not have any CSS keys to compare against and the disc wont play.

looks like the only way around at this point is compromising players or identifying and jamming the watermark itself.

xenex

20th January 2011, 09:00

@Mug Funky

I have read the specs over and over, and I think you are mistaken on at least a couple of things, I'll explain why I think so.

The spec says there are two possible flagging-types of Cinavia - NO_HOME_USE and TRUSTED_SOURCE. So, if the Cinavia was to be added in post-production, they would have to at least create two audio tracks, one for each flag. The NO_HOME_USE is for theatrical releases, screeners, etc. And it OVERRIDES the TRUSTED_SOURCE mark.

So, if a pressed Blu-Ray or DVD contained the NO_HOME_USE mark, it wouldn't be able to play at all! According to everything I have read so far, if NO_HOME_USE mark is found, playback stops. Period.

it may in fact be that the AACS folder is not an attempt to break copying, but in fact an attempt to not break playback on a cinavia equipped device. if a player finds cinavia on a DVD with no hashtable, it must stop playback. otherwise removing it from an infected disc would be as easy as not burning that extra folder.
just thinking... the hashtable would probably use the CSS keys that are pressed into a separate physical part of the disc (DVD-R's don't have them). this means it would have to be generated at the glass-mastering stage, after scrambling.

The hashtable doesn't concern itself with CSS keys at all - it hashes the VOB files on the disc - all of them - without regard to whether or not they are CSS encrypted. BUT - if a copy is made where CSS encryption is removed, then the hashes will no longer match. And the player is supposed to detect if they match, at least some percentage of them.

And although it seems a "new" hashtable could be created - I believe it can - the AACS CERT file hashes the hashtable! And is signed using AES public/private key crypto. using a special AACSLA private key that no one knows.

looks like the only way around at this point is compromising players or identifying and jamming the watermark itself.

Yes, I agree with that. At least for those own/use Cinavia-enabled playback gear.

EDIT TO ADD:

I have to say, on a purely technical level, I'm really impressed with the way AACSLA is going. Not that I like them, but they are thinking ahead. I could not originally foresee how they could add Cinavia to DVD, since the DVDCCA agreements could not force it. But, who makes mere DVD players now?! Hardly anyone. So, they are using the power of the AACS license to force makers of Blu-Ray gear to check for Cinavia on EVERYTHING, even DVD, as part of the terms of manufacturing a licensed device. And it probably won't be long (year or two) before the only disc-playback device that one can even find to purchase is an AACS-licensed Blu-Ray device.

Ghitulescu

20th January 2011, 09:53

Not that I like them, but they are thinking ahead. I could not originally foresee how they could add Cinavia to DVD, since the DVDCCA agreements could not force it. But, who makes mere DVD players now?! Hardly anyone. So, they are using the power of the AACS license to force makers of Blu-Ray gear to check for Cinavia on EVERYTHING, even DVD, as part of the terms of manufacturing a licensed device. And it probably won't be long (year or two) before the only disc-playback device that one can even find to purchase is an AACS-licensed Blu-Ray device.

I said it before....
who stands behind both licencing bodies?
So why wonder?

rotty

20th January 2011, 09:57

well... actually... as far as has been determined (apologies for not providing the link, but it can be found in this thread), the only information we've got from industry people working with this is that at least at one point the watermark can be applied during the sound mix stage. this is in post-production, and long before it hits the DVD studio and any audio encoders.

Hi Mug Funky

I was talking about protection in general, the studios (sorry we) do pay for that.

As for Cinavia, I dont know but im sure someone does.

derbeDeus

20th January 2011, 09:58

rotty

20th January 2011, 10:08

Two supermarkets near me started a blu ray section in the with the DVD's about two years ago.

It has got slightly larger up until about three months ago, and now they are defiantly getting smaller and smaller in both supermarkets (Tesco and ASDA).

I’m not saying that anything in particular has caused this and I don’t know it that is meaningful but I was surprised.

Has anyone else seen this.

SamuriHL

20th January 2011, 14:47

Just a FYI, if you go to this page:

http://www.aacsla.com/license/

And download the PDF named AACS Final Content Participant Agreement (it's the 2nd link) and go to page 150, you will see "Table W" which lists the various DRM's that can be considered TRUSTED_SOURCE. There appear to be twelve trusted DRM methods so far, it seems.

Nice find! Thanks for posting that. Very interesting info.

EDIT: Oh man, number 5 worries me, although I'm not sure how Cinavia could be implemented on it. I've actually been wondering quite a bit whether they would try. For those not familiar with FairPlay, it's Apple's DRM for iTunes content. Yes, that means all the digital copies you get on your new BD's. I doubt they'd add Cinavia to FairPlay protected titles simply because they're (in theory) not playable on anything but apple hardware/software anyway. However, it is one of the TRUSTED_SOURCES listed in the AACS content agreement, so, um, hmmmm.

SamuriHL

20th January 2011, 15:17

And although it seems a "new" hashtable could be created - I believe it can - the AACS CERT file hashes the hashtable! And is signed using AES public/private key crypto. using a special AACSLA private key that no one knows.

That part I didn't know. That actually makes sense and helps to explain why it's not as vulnerable as it appears. If you can't recreate the AACS Cert, then even being able to recreate the hashtable with non-CSS crippled VOBS wouldn't do you any good. And good luck breaking AES encryption and finding the private key to sign it with. Maybe someone's got one of them new fangled quantum toys they wanna let us borrow for a few seconds? :D

SamuriHL

20th January 2011, 15:19

Thanks for that. Looking at table W, AACS Content can be in the form of "Prerecorded Video, Prepared Video or Recordable Video". So if PS3 bans the new solution in a future firmware, they'll break the AACS license. Good to know ;)

ROFLMAO! That is indeed one way to look at it! :)

kurkosdr

20th January 2011, 16:01

Don't want to be a nuisance, but one last silly question (please): Has anyone actually tried to diff the dts track from a non cinavia watermarked DVD and the cinavia watermarked dts track of the Bluray? There is nothing to lose.

Anyway, in the worst case scenario, just admit your ps3 won't play any back ups and go buy a dedicated MKV player (just make sure it reads usb drives formatted with ntfs and ext3 and can downscale dts to stereo, and if english is not your first language, also check it can read srt's with your language's encoding). Problem solved. Thats what I did. Cinavia opened a bad can of worms IMO, where the studios have the ability to control what you play on your device, even he it's a file you produced yourself. And until they get the lawsuit they deserve, i dont want to be part of this.

SamuriHL

20th January 2011, 16:32

kurkosdr

20th January 2011, 17:44

Yea, if you read through this thread it's been tried before. The problem is that the tracks wouldn't be identical even without Cinavia, so, finding the "cinavia stuff" is kinda like the proverbial needle in the haystack. Ideally, the best approach to Cinavia would be to rip apart the algorithm that checks for the signal, see what it's looking for, and then you can do several things with that. First and foremost, you can write your own detector so you can identify Cinavia infected tracks. Second if you know what they're looking for, you might be able to create a clever mechanism for "jamming" it and breaking the detection routine. Of course the trick is to do so inaudibly and not breaking the audio further than Cinavia already does. Finally, if you know the algorithm and what it's looking for, you should be able to isolate the signal embedded in the audio track and then begin to work on removing it. That's the final, most permanent solution. Of course, this sounds so easy in theory. Sure, just find a player like the PS3 that's willing to give up the algorithm and you're all set. Yea, um, no. :) Even if you had the algorithm given to you, you'd still have a *LOT* of work to do. So far, no one I know of has even that much.
Thanks for the bunch of info. I think we should make a "Cinavia files" thread were everyone will dump diffed tracks, leaked firmwares (if that last one is against the rules, then just post the model whose firmware was leaked), pdfs and generally any relevant files. So that new members willing to take up the difficult task of cracking cinavia wont have to start from scratch everytime.

Anyway, i believe this thing is like somewhat like cactus data shield. It does not need to be cracked. People will hate it so much that they ll buy MKV players, and then offset the cost by pirating all their stuff and not buying/renting anything original. This is how the real world works, from my short experience in it.

Peer van Heuen

20th January 2011, 18:06

Anyway, i believe this thing is like somewhat like cactus data shield. It does not need to be cracked. People will hate it so much that they ll buy MKV players, and then offset the cost by pirating all their stuff and not buying/renting anything original. This is how the real world works, from my short experience in it.

No it doesn't. Not the very least bit. Take that from my probably significantly longer experience in that same world ;)

derbeDeus

20th January 2011, 18:18

And good luck breaking AES encryption and finding the private key to sign it with. AES is a symmetric algo, you don't sign with it. It's ECDSA that is used for content signing (with AACS_CC key).

Don't want to be a nuisance, but one last silly question (please): Has anyone actually tried to diff the dts track from a non cinavia watermarked DVD and the cinavia watermarked dts track of the Bluray? There is nothing to lose.

Well, yes there is... time. I'm sorry, but this is the sort of naïve approach that will lead nowhere. Such watermarks are not a black spot on an image, they have several layers and each encodes its information in a different way. You diff first layer, then what? You're still in the woods.

Fact: Cinavia it's more complicated than DVD-Audio watermark. So to start talking about removing Cinavia and be useful, a fair understanding of DVD-Audio is recommended, I'd say.

SamuriHL

20th January 2011, 18:21

I have to agree with Peer on that one. I think the majority of people are like me. We invest a lot of money in the equipment to play the discs. Then we spend a lot of money purchasing the discs we want to own every month. To protect that investment, we want to backup that large collection. Also, it's nice having it all ripped to a hard drive so your collection is easily accessable without fumbling around with discs. Back them up to ISO, mount them, and play them like the original. So far the software players aren't Cinavia infected, but, they all will be at some point or another. That's going to cause me a large headache for a while. Yes, I personally backup most of my discs as MKV and play them in an OSS player that ignores Cinavia, but, I also watch a lot of rented discs that I don't ever rip. And I *ALWAYS* have AnyDVD running when I watch ANY disc. God, SlyPlayer can't come out fast enough. :)

SamuriHL

20th January 2011, 18:22

AES is a symmetric algo, you don't sign with it. It's ECDSA that is used for content signing (with AACS_CC key).

My mistake. I'm not overly well versed in encryption. Just enough to be dangerous but clearly not enough to understand all facets of it. Thanks for the clarification. I'm guessing that's not any easier to break to find the private key to sign with? :D

derbeDeus

20th January 2011, 22:20

I'm guessing that's not any easier to break to find the private key to sign with? :D

It all depends on the implementation. While normally I should say "not in our lifetime", considering the latest mistakes made by Sony in PS3... it could be "in less than a minute" ;)

Only that AACSLA is not Sony, so they should be safe on this one. Btw: ECDSA seems to be the "latest fashion" for public crypto :p

SamuriHL

20th January 2011, 22:27

It all depends on the implementation. While normally I should say "not in our lifetime", considering the latest mistakes made by Sony in PS3... it could be "in less than a minute" ;)

Only that AACSLA is not Sony, so they should be safe on this one. Btw: ECDSA seems to be the "latest fashion" for public crypto :p

I admit to being behind on that one. Guess it's time to go look at it. I had been keeping up on all the "latest" encryption standards for a while but have slacked off lately. Cinavia seems to have upped the ante a little bit. As for your Sony comment, yeaaaaa, I'd say that's pretty accurate. If you can't beat em, sue em. ;)

xenex

22nd January 2011, 12:32

Just for my own interest, and testing I wanted to verify some of the AACS stuff on the "Takers" DVD. I first found the SHA-1 hash of the CSS_CONTENT_HASH_TABLE.AACS file:

xenex@MBOXL:~/Desktop$ openssl dgst -sha1 CSS_CONTENT_HASH_TABLE.AACS
SHA1(CSS_CONTENT_HASH_TABLE.AACS)= 21b2d3371de6a1aa167d53e5683a5c84051cee75

And I also made a small program to read the CSS_CONTENT_CERT file:

xenex@MBOXL:~/Desktop/aacschk$ ./a.out /dev/sr0

total_blocks = 2976742
AACS Folder Found!

FN: css_content_cert.aacs Found CERT LSN:2972640

FN: css_content_hash_table.aacs Found HASH LSN:2972641

Certificate Type : 80
Reserved : 00
Total # of Hash Units : 000038fa
Total # of Layers : 01
Layer_Number : 00
Number of Hash Units : 000038fa
Number of Digests : 0001
Applicant ID : 0002
Content Sequence # : c0020e80
Reserved : 0000
Reserved : 0000
Len. Format Spec. Sec.: 0000
Reserved : 0000
Content HTDigest : 68 3a 5c 84 05 1c ee 75
Signature Data : 66 83 32 0d 19 6c d8 a3 1c 11 e8 22 11 28 b7 49 9d e9 62 dd 72 79 bf 86 cc 9f 74 25 1b 31 c3 05 49 ba f3 6b 78 b1 33 1d

So, at least I notice that the final 8 bytes from "Content HTDigest" match the final 8 bytes of the SHA-1 hash of the CSS_CONTENT_HASH_TABLE.AACS

Nothing genius here, ofc, and I doubt the "Signature Data" has the "SONY mistake." But there is only the one "Takers" DVD to look at so far. Be interesting to look at the next few that come out.

setarip_old

22nd January 2011, 16:31

@xenex

What are you referring to when you speak of the "SONY mistake"?

SamuriHL

22nd January 2011, 16:32

@xenex

What are you referring to when you speak of the "SONY mistake"?

Not keeping their private key for the PS3 secure.

derbeDeus

23rd January 2011, 00:34

Not keeping their private key for the PS3 secure.

Hum, not realy. They kept it secure, it never left Sony HQ, it was not a leak :)
"SONY mistake" refers to the use of ECDSA algo to sign executables which has a requirement to provide a random number... and Sony used same "random" therefore creating signatures with same first half. Somebody noticed and calculated the, otherwise very well kept, private key :p

For some reason also the public key to verify the AACS certs is not very public. I think I've seen it somewhere...78....

SamuriHL

23rd January 2011, 01:09

Hum, not realy. They kept it secure, it never left Sony HQ, it was not a leak :)
"SONY mistake" refers to the use of ECDSA algo to sign executables which has a requirement to provide a random number... and Sony used same "random" therefore creating signatures with same first half. Somebody noticed and calculated the, otherwise very well kept, private key :p

For some reason also the public key to verify the AACS certs is not very public. I think I've seen it somewhere...78....

LOL! :) Ok, well, my interpretation of that is that they didn't secure the private key very well. :D When I work on code, when I need a random number, I tend to, you know, make it at least "pseudo" random. SONY mistake indeed!!!

derbeDeus

23rd January 2011, 01:19

SONY un-f***ing-believable mistake! You come to think that they did it on purpose
1,2,3,4... would have been better than same "random". Millions of programmers would not have made that mistake.
Once again Sony confirms that they are absolutely terrible at software and quite brilliant at hardware.

SamuriHL

23rd January 2011, 01:26

I couldn't agree with that last statement more if I wanted to. Good thing they let someone else write Cinavia for them. :D

setarip_old

23rd January 2011, 03:30

@derbeDeus

Hi!

Thanks for your answer to my question;>}

I gather this is a reference to the "stuff" I posted about in Post#448 of this thread:A randomized variable was made a constant instead, the hack means that any code can now be signed to made to look like officially sanctioned code, and there's not a thing Sony can do about it.

In other words, the PS3 can no longer tell legal, authorized software apart from pirated ones that have been signed using the leaked key.

spock2000

23rd January 2011, 04:05

Just to let everyone know. I just ripped and compressed the Blu ray movie Salt with Dvdfab beta 8.0.7.2. I burned it to a 25gb Sony BD-RE. The movie played flawlessly from beginning to end on my Sony PS3 with the newest 3.55 firmware.:)

setarip_old

23rd January 2011, 04:41

@spock2000

HI!

Did you also confirm that if you hadn't used DVDFab, "Cinavia" would show up?

spock2000

23rd January 2011, 05:06

That is correct. I must use Dvdfab because it creates a protected blu-ray disk. It creates a AACSmv folder along with the usual BDMV and Certificate folder. I get the feeling that Cinavia will be a thing of the past here pretty soon,thanks to everyones efforts:sly:

mike20021969

23rd January 2011, 10:55

I get the feeling that Cinavia will be a thing of the pastIt will be interesting to see, out of the 2 competitors, who permanently beats this first.

I know who I'd like to see win, but I get a feeling they may get sliver.

xenex

23rd January 2011, 10:59

@derbeDeus

Hi!

Thanks for your answer to my question;>}

I gather this is a reference to the "stuff" I posted about in Post#448 of this thread:

What derbeDeus described in re: to my mention of the "SONY Mistake" is exactly what I meant. I should have explained it better. And yes, setarip_old, what you refer to in your post #448 is the exact same issue.

There is an IF here. It's a big if! But if the private AACSLA key is 'leaked' or if someone manages to re-construct it, then at least for Cinavia DVDs it would be possible to re-create the hash table and re-create a signed AACS Certificate.

For Cinavia-infected DVDs (at least) this would be a valid solution. And if I were a fortune-teller, I'd guess that SlySoft and DVDFab are already looking at this approach.

I'm not a fortune-teller, though. So take what I say with a peanut and a grain of salt.

rotty

23rd January 2011, 14:43

Hi all

Just out of interest, what happens if the player can tell if the inserted disk is a -R or a ROM.

I dont know if current hardware can or cant but future.

It could be that future players will only allow play of watermarked disks if the disk is a ROM.

I think what Peer said is the only way, remove the "stink" as he says from the audio.

setarip_old

23rd January 2011, 20:24

@mike20021969 It will be interesting to see, out of the 2 competitors, who permanently beats this first.
Not everyone operates in the glare of daylight ;>}

derbeDeus

23rd January 2011, 20:35

Hi all

Just out of interest, what happens if the player can tell if the inserted disk is a -R or a ROM.

I dont know if current hardware can or cant but future.

It could be that future players will only allow play of watermarked disks if the disk is a ROM.

They can tell the difference, or course. Iirc, PS3 tells you that in the XMB interface.
Otoh, recordables are among Trusted Source, in the AACS specs, see here (http://forum.doom9.org/showpost.php?p=1472915&postcount=636).

rotty

23rd January 2011, 23:20

They can tell the difference, or course. Iirc, PS3 tells you that in the XMB interface.
Otoh, recordables are among Trusted Source, in the AACS specs, see here (http://forum.doom9.org/showpost.php?p=1472915&postcount=636).

Hi derbeDeus

Thanks for info.

xenex

24th January 2011, 09:33

So, it appears according to here:

http://forum.dvdfab.com/showthread.php?t=7102

There will be another Cinavia-infected DVD coming soon. "Burlesque" Starring Cher and Aguilera, LOL! This can be verified with the back-cover scan here:

http://www.dvdempire.com/Exec/v4_item.asp?item_id=1563964&tab=5&back=1&anchor=1#topoftabs

Props to Sony for testing their new protections on movies that no one would EVER want to watch. If I can find a Redbox free-rental code when this comes out, I'll take a look at the AACS folder. I won't pay $1 for the rental, though. And I certainly won't waste my time watching it!

setarip_old

25th January 2011, 03:00

VLC has a few colorful built-in tools: oscilloscope, VU meter, spectrometer - that appear in a separate window while the video is playing. Is this of any use to "those in the know", regarding Cinavia tracking and analysis?

lchiu7

25th January 2011, 04:43

I was watching a "backed up" copy of Salt the other day and since this titile apparently has Cinavia protection we did an experiment.

We extracted the h.264 video and DTS audio from the backup and using tsmuxer created a one hour AVCHD version of the movie.

We then burnt this to a DVD as UDF 2.5 and put it in a PS3 with the latest firmware. The PS3 recognised the disc as AVCHD but played it with no video, just audio.

Then we put the same disc into an Oppo BDP80 BluRay player and on that player the title played fine with both audio and video.

So having never seen Cinavia protection before I thought you saw an error message so the fact there was no video might because of the way the disc was authored. I guess some more experimenting is required.

dvgeek

25th January 2011, 22:14

@Ichiu7

Here is something I had posted in another thread
http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?p=1473466#post1473466

To add to what I had done - I remuxed the original movie track with the DTSHDMA audio track and put it on a BD-RE.

On the PS3 - Cinavia protection kicked in
On the BDP-S360 - Played flawlessly
On the NeoTV550 - Played flawlessly

@spock2000

I checked my Salt rip (via AnyDVDHD) and it does not have the AACSmv folder that you mentioned that is created by DVDFab. Have to check out DVDFab out to see if the rips can be reencoded to BD9's.

Thanks to all.

lchiu7

25th January 2011, 23:08

fengtao

26th January 2011, 02:39

Hi dvgeek,

BD-9/5 is DVD media, not Blu-ray media, so it cannot be burnt as BDMV-REC, since it doesn't support AACS auth.

We are checking it we can burn it as AVCREC now.

Best Regards,
Fengtao

setarip_old

26th January 2011, 03:54

@fengtao

Hi! BD-9/5 is DVD media, not Blu-ray media, so it cannot be burnt as BDMV-REC, since it doesn't support AACS auth.

1) What is "auth" an abbreviation for, "authoring", "authorization", "authentication", or something else?

2) When you say BD/DVD5s and 9s "don't support AACS auth.", are you saying that it's not physically possible, or that it's not legally/ethically possible?

I sense that the following may be somehow applicable to your thinking and greatly appreciated efforts thus far:

http://www.aacsla.com/specifications/AACS_Spec_Signed_CSS_Final_0.951.pdf

This document, the Signed CSS book, defines how to use AACS to validate the integrity of audiovisual content protected by CSS Technology provided by DVD CCA.

fengtao

26th January 2011, 04:18

I mean "authorization", maybe I'm not clear here, AACS authorization is the ability of a drive, so for BD-9/5, I should say: it doesn't support binding nonce, so cannot be burnt as BDMV-REC.

fengtao

26th January 2011, 06:08

Hi setarip_old,

Thank you very much for the document.

Best Regards,
Fengtao

setarip_old

26th January 2011, 09:54

Thank you very much for the document.You're quite welcome ; >}

setarip_old

26th January 2011, 20:07

@fengtao

In light of the Cinavia "situation", perhaps it would be a good idea to re-activate and enhance (Convert Blu-ray to HD-DVD) HD-DVD support in the DVDFab product line?

SamuriHL

26th January 2011, 20:19

Could you explain how that would possibly help Cinavia? :confused: HD DVD structures aren't supported on any Blu-ray player I'm aware of except one software player that as of yet doesn't do Cinavia detection anyway. So how would converting to HD DVD help those that have Cinavia infected players?

setarip_old

26th January 2011, 20:44

Could you explain how that would possibly help Cinavia?I'm fairly certain that "fengtao" and others with similar qualifications can determine if it might be worthwhile to pursue "the other" High Definition format that, like Blu-ray, uses a blue laser - and couples that with a basic file format much like that of a standard DVD.

(At this juncture, I'll choose to take the route previously suggested by "neuron2")

SamuriHL

26th January 2011, 21:23

Well, HD DVD uses evo files. I'm not sure how that's similar to that of a standard DVD. Again, though, I'm not sure how this helps those with a cinavia infected blu-ray player. If I'm reading between the lines of what you're suggesting, and I could be mistaken here, I believe you're thinking that since HD DVD employed AACS, and AACS is required to diffuse Cinavia detection, that somehow that format in some way would help fengtao and others to come up with a way to use AACS on DVD5/9 backups? Is that what you were getting at? If not, I apologize as I'm quite confused by the mention of HD DVD and Cinavia.

ChiDragon

27th January 2011, 07:47

Since I had no video from the beginning and audio on the PS3 I might have done something wrong when I created the AVCHD disc (I was using a DVD/RW) so might try again with a DVD-R.

I am idly curious what the error message looks like.

The PS3 Cinavia message really isn't ambiguous. :)

http://img51.imageshack.us/img51/8986/cinaviamute.png

xenex

27th January 2011, 09:24

Not only are the Cinavia messages quite unambiguous, they are explicitly REQUIRED by the AACS agreements. If people would actually read the specifications before idly speculating, there would be so much less confusion. So again I say, go to this page:

http://www.aacsla.com/license/

And download the PDF named AACS Final Content Participant Agreement. Go to page 92 and read section 2.52. I'll quote it here, and I have changed a few parts to bold text so that they may stand out.

2.52 “Trusted Source Mark Enforcement Action” means with respect to each such action required to be taken pursuant to the requirements of Part 4 Sections A.3 and A.4:

a. if a Licensed Access Product is Accessing particular Audiovisual Content for the purpose of playback:

(1) muting of any and all output of the audio portion of the screened Audiovisual Content where:

A. the muting of the audio output continues for no less than 15 seconds (the “Enforcement Period”);

B. the Licensed Access Product’s audio mute indicator associated with the screened Audiovisual Content, if present, is illuminated or otherwise set to indicate that the audio output is muted for the duration of the Trusted Source Mark Enforcement Action; and

C. the Licensed Access Product’s “un-mute” function associated with the screened Audiovisual Content is made inoperable for the duration of the Trusted Source Mark Enforcement Action; and

(2) display or direct to be displayed a written message concerning the reason for the muting of the audio, where the message so displayed or directed by the Licensed Access Product shall:

A. state either:

i. “Audio outputs temporarily muted. Do not adjust the playback volume. The content being played is protected by Cinavia and is not authorized for playback on this device. For more information, see http://www.cinavia.com. Message Code 3” or a message with substantially the same meaning (including, but not limited to, translation into a language other than English), provided that the Cinavia website URL (or an alternative Cinavia website URL that is established by Verance Corporation as applicable to a particular country or region) and message code number are either (x) included without change in the message, or (y) provided in written operating instructions provided with the Licensed Access Product; or

ii. “Cinavia playback restriction (3)”, or a message with substantially the same meaning (including, but not limited to, translation into a language other than English), provided that a message as specified in Part 1 Section 2.52.a.(2)A.i. is provided in the written operating instructions provided with the Licensed Access Product. For the avoidance of doubt, the message code number is not required to be included in a message with substantially the same meaning, provided that it is included in the written operating instructions provided with the Licensed Access Product.; and

B. be prominent, clear and legible on an active display available to the consumer, which AACS recommends to be the same screen as the video portion of the Audiovisual Content.; and

C. not direct consumers to any party or address other than the Adopter itself, the Cinavia website URL as stated above, or a mail address provided expressly for this purpose by Verance Corporation, without the explicit written permission of that third party, nor state or indicate to the consumer that AACS, Verance Corporation, Content Participants or Content Providers (in general or by specific name) are responsible for the enforcement action taken by the Licensed Access Product.

Ghitulescu

27th January 2011, 09:28

If people would actually read the specifications before idly speculating, there would be so much less confusion.

That's the point I've raised long time ago.

On one hand, speculating is a bad thing, as it would unnecessarily waste resources on false tracks. But on the other hand, it is helpful to hide the real progress behind a smoke barrier.

ChiDragon

27th January 2011, 22:01

That part about not stating that AACS, Verance, and the film publisher are the reason you're staring at this message is interesting...

xenex

28th January 2011, 11:15

@ChiDragon

That last "C" part is interesting, isn't it. It kind of says "don't blame us, AACS, Verance, or the studios! Aim your anger at Cinavia!!!" Which, as Ghitulescu says, is a smokescreen! Go to:

http://www.cinavia.com

And TRY TO FIND any contact information, physical address, email address, etc, or any way to contact them. You won't find it, because it is not there. Try to use 'WHOIS' to see who owns the 'cinavia.com' web domain. You will not get far there either. It's a "shell" website badly made with a few pieces of 'clip-art' to make people think that there is a "Cinavia Company." There is not.

The "Cinavia" name and the 'cinavia.com' website are just a shell set up BY the AACS and the studios for people to direct their anger to. There is NO real "Cinavia" company - they don't exist! They have no contact information! AACS just named their watermark Cinavia and threw up a quick and dirty website for people to be fooled by. So, consumer, sucker, you are out of luck. If you have a complaint, email "Cinavia" (at their nonexistent email) or contact them (at their nonexistent contact page.)

And don't bother to contact AACS, Verance, or the studios. It's all Cinavia's fault. They did it!!!!

Clever them.

Ghitulescu

28th January 2011, 11:46

Cinavia is a Trademark and as such it should be in a Registry; I'm not familiar with US regulations so I don't know exactly its name.
http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=doc&state=4008:akav6f.2.3

xenex

28th January 2011, 11:55

@Ghitulescu

Sometimes, I don't know if you agree with me, or disagree. What I am saying is that - even IF "Cinavia" is a trademark, or whatever, the studios and the AACSLA are using the "Cinavia" name - and website:

http://www.cinavia.com/

To direct anger to "Cinavia" itself, which is a thing that does not really exist. The AACS watermark exists, of course, but the Cinavia website just gives the watermark a "name" and has NO CONTACT INFORMATION.

I call it "passing the buck." It directs the angry customer to the dead-end website "cinavia.com" which has no contact information. The customer is only left to be mad at "Cinavia" which is not even a real thing! It is a brand name MADE by the AACSLA and studios to make the customer hit a dead-end!!

OF COURSE the AACSLA, Verance, and the studios invented the audio watermark! You KNOW they did. They just made up a name - "Cinavia" - and made up a website - "cinavia.com" to "pass the buck" and shift the blame!

Just LOOK at the "cinavia.com" website. It is basically 3 pages with "warnings" about Cinavia messages and NO CONTACT INFORMATION AT ALL. There is no "ABOUT US." There is no "CONTACT US." There is no "WHO WE ARE." There is no address or telephone number. In fact, there is no way to contact them at all. No real company I have ever seen has a website such as this. This is a fake "shell" website to be a dead-end for people who get Cinavia messages. Period.

Ghitulescu

28th January 2011, 13:02

I agree with you

I just wanted to explain that there is a "findable" connection between CINAVIA and Verance and this can be found as I did. However, Average Joe doesn't know this. I haven't read the patents for a long while, but I think no cinavia is mentioned there (I think that's against the regulations of the USPTO). So the only way of finding the owner is this. Who stand behind Verance Corporation, well, that's another story....

derbeDeus

28th January 2011, 19:56

I agree too. www.cinavia.com is a dead end. And xenex makes a very good point. It did occur to me that it's very "slim" in content and does not make any reference to Verance or even AACS - it seemed weird. There are references from Verance and AACS to Cinavia but not the other way around, which is exactly what an average user will do.
Let's just hope that the average user will use a search engine or wikipedia to find the real ppl behind Cinavia.

Btw: I wonder if Rade Petrović & co. get more "fan mail" these days? :devil:

badbackUp

28th January 2011, 20:50

Another thing interesting from that web site is the "10 minutes of cinavia, followed by 10 min of non-copyrighted music, followed by...", etc. There seems to be an effort to allow limited-use.

setarip_old

28th January 2011, 21:54

@xenex, @Ghitulescu

Please note that I've made a minor addition to the title of this thread, so that at least those who read this thread may be aware of the connection ;>}

However, I really think this is much ado about nothing. Anyone whose curiosity and/or anger is piqued and who has the most basic knowledge of search engines can simply perform a Googlesearch for "cinavia.com+owned" (WITHOUT the quotation marks) - and the first hit will take you to:

https://www.trademarkia.com/protected-c-cinaviacom-85070039.html

PROTECTED C CINAVIA.COM - Trademark by Verance Corporation San ...1 post - Last post: Jun 23, 2010
Find up to date information on PROTECTED C CINAVIA. ... COM. This trademark is owned by Verance C..., ********, San Diego, CA 92121. ...

Ghitulescu

29th January 2011, 07:44

@setarip_old:

try not to forget that the results of a google search depends on the country (IP address). One also needs not to forget that some domains can be "invalidated" by the local ISP (observing laws, requests and so on). And it's not really a rare case when a resource simply "disappeared".

ChiDragon

29th January 2011, 08:27

Looks like Verance hadn't decided what to call their services when they registered the trademarks on July 2, 2008. At the same time they registered marks for "Sonavia" and "Meravia". Each of these, including Cinavia, is registered as a digital watermarking service, but each also has a second registration (https://www.trademarkia.com/cinavia-77513377.html) for

Market research services, namely, providing audience data, viewership data, listener data, and proof of performance data to advertisers and media buyers relating to broadcast content; conducting online business research, namely, providing searching, cataloging, and reporting services, for purposes of finding the global computer network locations of audio, video, and audiovisual content for owners and providers of the audio, video, and audiovisual content

Does that mean part of their business plan is actively tracking down the internet pirates?

Ghitulescu

29th January 2011, 13:06

Tracking the pirates is patented (in the US only) AFAIK since 1995 or so. Nothing new under the sun.

SamuriHL

3rd February 2011, 15:07

WOO HOO! Forums are back. Now I can ask a question that I've been wanting an answer to. Has anyone tried a DVDFab backup of a Cinavia disc with the 3.56 PS3 firmware? Has anything changed? Thanks!

setarip_old

3rd February 2011, 19:26

@SamuriHL Has anyone tried a DVDFab backup of a Cinavia disc with the 3.56 PS3 firmware?

Does it make a difference if it's already been hacked? (by "KaKaRoToKS")

Has anything changed?This was posted at another forum (before the hack was noted): seems to include a new master key to counter the leak, and the 3.55 CFW.

(I do not have a PS3 - "CFW" stands for "custom firmware". More than that I don't know)

SamuriHL

3rd February 2011, 19:34

@SamuriHL

Does it make a difference if it's already been hacked? (The following is for information only)

This was posted at another forum (before the hack was noted):

(I do not have a PS3 - "CFW" stands for "custom firmware". More than that I don't know)

It's good that they're continuing to hack the firmware for the PS3. However, afaik, that effort has done nothing (so far) related to Cinavia. I hope that someone does in fact use those tools to work on the Cinavia issue for the PS3.

My question, in particular, was whether or not the situation has changed with regard to the DVDFab method of making "TRUSTED_SOURCE" backups. Some have suggested that there's nothing they can do because a recordable disc with AACS on it is in fact considered part of the "TRUSTED_SOURCE" dataset by default according to the standard. I'd be curious to see how, if at all, Cinavia evolves in future firmware updates to counter this and other attacks.

My expectation is that Cinavia will end up being similar to BD+ in that it will "evolve" over time as new attacks are released against it. One would have to think that Verance learned from history that a "static" protection without the ability to change and adapt is futile. It'll be interesting to see if anything is done to prevent these AACS recordable disc backups from working going forward. That's why I was asking if the unmodified 3.56 firmware has changed anything in that regard.

setarip_old

3rd February 2011, 20:02

@SamuriHL

I've removed the link from my post (as it might be misconstrued as inappropriate) - and would appreciate if you also removed it from your quote. Thank you.

SamuriHL

3rd February 2011, 20:06

@SamuriHL

I've removed the link from my post (as it might be miscostrued as inappropriate) - and would appreciate if you also removed it from your quote. Thank you.

Done. Not a problem. :)

haggi

5th February 2011, 23:22

Is the cinavia.com website also "officially mentioned" to German customers? If so they are begging to be sued. There is a German law that requires every company to mention its identity on every website (some even say this applies to personal websites intended for German citizen). As they don't even give away who they are on the German version, they to not comply with German law. Any German lawyer around? ;) The law even requires the starting page of the website to provide a direct link to the aforementioned information.

PS: Providing a German version of a website is considered to be prove enough to qualify the website to be intended for German citizens.

PPS: Die ist keine Rechtsberatung. Für eine verbindliche Einschätzung der Rechtslage kontaktieren Sie bitten einen zugelassenen Anwalt. (The German law requires me to state that this is my personal opinion and one is to contact a registered lawyer to get a "qualified" opinion.)

tripmaster

7th February 2011, 14:46

@fengtao, thanks for your work.

It doesnt seem yet possible to compress a BD rip to a file that can be played on a handheld device or stored (economically) on the PS3 HD, does it?

-trippy

Hi dvgeek,

BD-9/5 is DVD media, not Blu-ray media, so it cannot be burnt as BDMV-REC, since it doesn't support AACS auth.

We are checking it we can burn it as AVCREC now.

Best Regards,
Fengtao

setarip_old

7th February 2011, 18:46

@tripmaster

Hi!

Your post doesn't seem to have anything to do with the topic of this thread, which is, "'Cinavia'/Verance BluRay audio watermark protection"

tripmaster

7th February 2011, 19:42

Isn't the question of being able to compress and archive Cinavia protected discs relevant? I am not storing 20gb archives on my PS3...

@tripmaster

Hi!

Your post doesn't seem to have anything to do with the topic of this thread, which is, "'Cinavia'/Verance BluRay audio watermark protection"

setarip_old

7th February 2011, 20:18

@tripmaster

Your QUESTION makes no reference to Cinavia: It doesnt seem yet possible to compress a BD rip to a file that can be played on a handheld device or stored (economically) on the PS3 HD, does it?
In fact, as has been posted from virtually the beginning of this thread, there is absolutely no problem in compressing a "Cinavia"-infected Blu-ray disc - and, presently, such a backup would be playable on virtually any (with rare exception) hardware device except PS3s with firmware updates newer than v.3.15...

tripmaster

7th February 2011, 20:49

But also acknowledged here that the PS3 is one of the most prevalent BR devices here. I'd love to hear whether there's a solution in the works that addresses compressed MP4 videos from my BR master that is playable on the PS3.

Apologies, I should have made it more clear - Cinavia protected discs, compressed for archive/playback on a PS3 via something like TVersity.

trippy

@tripmaster

Your QUESTION makes no reference to Cinavia:
In fact, as has been posted from virtually the beginning of this thread, there is absolutely no problem in compressing a "Cinavia"-infected Blu-ray disc - and, presently, such a backup would be playable on virtually any (with rare exception) hardware device except PS3s with firmware updates newer than v.3.15...

SamuriHL

7th February 2011, 20:56

But also acknowledged here that the PS3 is one of the most prevalent BR devices here. I'd love to hear whether there's a solution in the works that addresses compressed MP4 videos from my BR master that is playable on the PS3.

Apologies, I should have made it more clear - Cinavia protected discs, compressed for archive/playback on a PS3 via something like TVersity.

trippy

The only way to do that is to remove Cinavia from the audio track. That hasn't been done to date. The method DVDFab uses adds AACS encryption to a BD disc structure. This puts the backup in the TRUSTED_SOURCE list and Cinavia doesn't get triggered. If you remove that AACS layer, Cinavia's going to get triggered no matter what container you put it in, and no matter how you compress it. To do what you want you simply MUST remove the Cinavia signal or somehow disrupt it by modifying it.

tripmaster

8th February 2011, 13:28

The only way to do that is to remove Cinavia from the audio track. That hasn't been done to date. The method DVDFab uses adds AACS encryption to a BD disc structure. This puts the backup in the TRUSTED_SOURCE list and Cinavia doesn't get triggered. If you remove that AACS layer, Cinavia's going to get triggered no matter what container you put it in, and no matter how you compress it. To do what you want you simply MUST remove the Cinavia signal or somehow disrupt it by modifying it.

Right - that's what I was hoping to hear that fengtao's working on...

rotty

8th February 2011, 14:16

Right - that's what I was hoping to hear that fengtao's working on...

Absloutley right.
Forget about TRUSTED_SOURCE and alike, if you have optical burned media with Cinavia left within the audio then you are asking to have it come back and BITE you at some point in the future, even if it is classed as TRUSTED_SOURCE (AACS) at the moment.

Domestic burned media with a comercial watermark could so easily be classed as NON TRUSTED_SOURCE anyway.
Dont rely on legal aspects of this, IT MUST BE REMOVED.

SamuriHL

8th February 2011, 14:32

I only know of one company that's actively working on removal. SlySoft has stated that is their goal. I can't speak to what Fengtao is working on. But from what I understand, it's going to take a lot of work to remove the signal without destroying the audio. Definitely a challenging and daunting task for anyone.

Ghitulescu

8th February 2011, 14:51

The method DVDFab uses adds AACS encryption to a BD disc structure. This puts the backup in the TRUSTED_SOURCE list and Cinavia doesn't get triggered. If you remove that AACS layer, Cinavia's going to get triggered no matter what container you put it in, and no matter how you compress it.

Absloutley right.
Forget about TRUSTED_SOURCE and alike, if you have optical burned media with Cinavia left within the audio then you are asking to have it come back and BITE you at some point in the future, even if it is classed as TRUSTED_SOURCE (AACS) at the moment.
I see the things a bit differently. Of course a method to remove CINAVIA is highly desirable. However, considering the reasons one backups his/her BDs (I mean here legally) the solution of FengTao is a welcomed intermediate step - who knows, until the full cinavia removal would be possible the original get scratched beyond repair.

SamuriHL

8th February 2011, 15:40

I see the things a bit differently. Of course a method to remove CINAVIA is highly desirable. However, considering the reasons one backups his/her BDs (I mean here legally) the solution of FengTao is a welcomed intermediate step - who knows, until the full cinavia removal would be possible the original get scratched beyond repair.

I wasn't trying to discount that method. That's not what we were discussing at all. The question was whether or not Fengtao is working on a way to make other types of backups that work. The only way, at the moment, to make ANY working backup is Fengtao's backup method. But for that to work, it requires a BD structure that's AACS encrypted. We were discussing what would be required to have a file that can be streamed to the PS3 through something like TVersity.

pepelugil

8th February 2011, 16:15

Hi,

My technical knowledge is practically zero, but if I not wrong after reading this thread, right now the only way to bypass (not eliminate) Cinavia protection is creating a disk with AACS.

As you can read here: http://www.spreadmyfiles.com/files/LCHFBZVM/data_protection.pdf , Sonic Scenarist has the option to encode its projects with AACS, so my question is, can I demux video and DTS-HD tracks from an infected disk, put them on Scenarist, enable AACS, mux them, burn the resulting disk and avoid Cinavia?

I don’t have a PS3 nor any infected player, so I cannot test it.

Greetings

SamuriHL

8th February 2011, 16:20

In theory that would work.

setarip_old

8th February 2011, 19:34

Post #710 here by Ghitulescu provides further support to the two-pronged attack I suggested in Post 578 here (in response to "Peer van Heuen"), to wit: I'd suggest that there are/should be two different objectives regarding overcoming the effects of Cinavia:

1) Long-term - As you propose, to devise a method that will REMOVE the watermarking from any and all Cinavia "infected" discs.

2) Short-term, the sooner the better - To devise a method that will prevent Cinavia from being activated when any and all Cinavia "infected" discs are played.

This short term solution would address the needs of the masses, in that no one making a legitimate backup copy would be confronted with a Cinavia-crippled disc. Such quick responses should also make it apparent to AACS-LA members and Verance that the Blu-ray business model's profit margin is actually being eroded by the cost of the application of Cinavia.

At the same time then, some of those truly knowledgable community members could remain focussed on the long-term goal of purging the watermarks from any and all discs.

Ajax_Undone

8th February 2011, 20:41

rotty

8th February 2011, 22:19

[SLiM]D12

8th February 2011, 22:35

2. It usually shows up and cancels the audio at about 30~45 minutes of viewing while displaying a stupid tard message.

It's actually right around the 20 min mark.

HWK

8th February 2011, 22:51

Sonic Scenarist has the option to encode its projects with AACS, so my question is, can I demux video and DTS-HD tracks from an infected disk, put them on Scenarist, enable AACS, mux them, burn the resulting disk and avoid Cinavia?

I don’t have a PS3 nor any infected player, so I cannot test it.

Greetings

No, That won't work, Sonic Scenarist only set aacs flag on video stream, actual stream is encrypted at replication plant. What's more once flag is applied it won't be any use to any blu-ray disc player until it is gone through replication plant. As such you can't put aacs in this manner at home, therefore can't make it work.

SamuriHL

8th February 2011, 23:44

One question because I am not as familiar as most about the idea and concept of Cinavia. First let me discribe all of what I have extrapolated from the many boring threads of this and other posts.

These are:

1. Cinavia is an audio watermark that is impermeable to encoding. (It would have to transcend the frequency on all levels; so it must also be inside the frequency of standard voice range communication)

Yea, no one yet has figured out exactly how the signal is embedded or if there's more than one signal. In any case, it does resist all attempts at re-encoding and even analog recording.

2. It usually shows up and cancels the audio at about 30~45 minutes of viewing while displaying a stupid tard message.

Correction, the message 3 used on commercial blu-rays shows up at 20 minutes. That is an arbitrary point, however, since message 1 infected tracks show up immediately and completely kill playback.

3. There may be a visual component but that remains to be seen. (Also transcends encoding Visible light = visible water mark)

No, there is no visual component to Cinavia. Tests I've done on The Losers prove that. I added the re-encoded audio track from the blu-ray to the non-Cinavia infected DVD and Cinavia was detected. It's an audio track only protection.

4. It responds to non AACS encrypted Cinavia infected content like its a plague.

Yes, it's very effective at its job. If Cinavia is detected, and it's the type of signal found on a commercial blu-ray, then it looks for a valid AACS certificate. If it's not found, error message 3 you get. If it's a recording of a theater performance of a movie, you will get an immediate error message 1 as the content is not authorized for home use at all.

So my question; as that I have yet to see it answered is. Do we have a list of timelines on the exact milli second level where Cinavia killed the audio?
If we knew where the triggers were we'd surly have better success removing them. The easiest way to find them IMHO would be a reversing of firmware infected with it and using it as a robot to find and dump portions of the audio data that trigger Cinavia on a bit level.

Considering that a player can detect Cinavia almost immediately on certain types of Cinavia signals (i.e. the ones that trigger error message 1), detection is very quick. It's not some "set points" where you can just remove a couple seconds of the film and be done with it. The signal is present in the entire audio track and detection is very fast. I'm sure there's redundant checks being done to eliminate "false positives", but you're still talking only a matter of seconds at most. No matter where you start playback from...

xenex

9th February 2011, 08:30

SamuriHL is correct, you will not find "trigger points." Verance has been very clever. According to the patents, there can be data encoded within the watermark that can introduce a random delay between the time the watermark is detected, and the time when playback/audio stops. And, although I have no way to test it, I surmise that they are already using this on the commercial media to give that ~20 minute 'grace period.'

From the patent "System reactions to the detection of embedded watermarks in a digital host content" -- Link:

http://www.google.com/patents/about?id=7c-pAAAAEBAJ

I found this on page 41:

http://www.google.com/patents?id=7c-pAAAAEBAJ&pg=PA41&img=1&zoom=4&hl=en&sig=ACfU3U1c7yf3RRx3hiZ23rpGBue1Cml5gQ&ci=503%2C213%2C359%2C563&edge=0

I don't know if I would say that Verance has "thought of everything" but I might indeed say that they have not missed much.

pepelugil

9th February 2011, 09:27

No, That won't work, Sonic Scenarist only set aacs flag on video stream, actual stream is encrypted at replication plant. What's more once flag is applied it won't be any use to any blu-ray disc player until it is gone through replication plant. As such you can't put aacs in this manner at home, therefore can't make it work.

Thanks for the clarification.

SamuriHL

9th February 2011, 14:21

I don't know if I would say that Verance has "thought of everything" but I might indeed say that they have not missed much.

It will be interesting to see how "adaptive" it is. Fengtao's backup method throws a wrinkle in their plan because, as has been stated before, it's actually considered a "trusted source". From a technical stand point, changing the implementation to detect Cinavia on a recordable media isn't really a problem. However, since that's part of the standard, we're left guessing as to whether or not they'll take that approach to "close that loophole" as it were. Only time will tell. What is for sure is that they're seeing some kind of success with Cinavia and that will embolden them to use it more going forward. We're already starting to see that.

rotty

9th February 2011, 21:18

It will be interesting to see how "adaptive" it is. Fengtao's backup method throws a wrinkle in their plan because, as has been stated before, it's actually considered a "trusted source". From a technical stand point, changing the implementation to detect Cinavia on a recordable media isn't really a problem. However, since that's part of the standard, we're left guessing as to whether or not they'll take that approach to "close that loophole" as it were. Only time will tell. What is for sure is that they're seeing some kind of success with Cinavia and that will embolden them to use it more going forward. We're already starting to see that.

We should all, at least, try and affect the sales figures for infected disks.

And as for HD TRUE audio, well.

Eustonstreet

10th February 2011, 07:09

This paper describes how to successfully attack earlier incarnations of VCMS/AV (AKA Cinavia). Enjoy.

http://www.usenix.org/events/sec01/craver.pdf

setarip_old

10th February 2011, 07:38

@Eustonstreet

Hi and welcome to the Doom9 Forums.

Perhaps there's nothing new under the sun?

See my Post #14, dated July 21, 2010, of this thread: If anyone with more technical knowledge than I have is interested, here's a link I came upon, to a "challenge" regarding audio watermarking, dating back to 2001:

http://www.usenix.org/publications/library/proceedings/sec01/craver.pdf

Eustonstreet

10th February 2011, 07:54

@setarip_old

Apologies, missed your previous post, so alas, nothing new. A very interesting bedtime read none the less.

Eza17

10th February 2011, 11:36

Considering that a player can detect Cinavia almost immediately on certain types of Cinavia signals (i.e. the ones that trigger error message 1), detection is very quick. It's not some "set points" where you can just remove a couple seconds of the film and be done with it. The signal is present in the entire audio track and detection is very fast. I'm sure there's redundant checks being done to eliminate "false positives", but you're still talking only a matter of seconds at most. No matter where you start playback from...

Backing up your statement, I posted some timings in post #405 which indicate that cinavia is reliably detected within 4 seconds of audio (detected in 3 seconds but takes longer probably due to it causing less reliable signals). After the 20ish minute 'grace' period, cinavia is immediately detected on any other playback. My tests were done with an arbitrary piece of audio chosen at random from a full audio clip.

SamuriHL

10th February 2011, 14:24

Backing up your statement, I posted some timings in post #405 which indicate that cinavia is reliably detected within 4 seconds of audio (detected in 3 seconds but takes longer probably due to it causing less reliable signals). After the 20ish minute 'grace' period, cinavia is immediately detected on any other playback. My tests were done with an arbitrary piece of audio chosen at random from a full audio clip.

Oh yea, that's right. I forgot about your post. Yea, that definitely shows there's no "trigger points" in the audio stream. They've embedded the signal like a tick. :)

Eza17

10th February 2011, 15:10

Oh yea, that's right. I forgot about your post. Yea, that definitely shows there's no "trigger points" in the audio stream. They've embedded the signal like a tick. :)

Ha, it's hard to remember any posts with over 700 now :)

@setarip_old
Just a suggestion but what about editing the very first post in this thread with the known facts, types 1 & 3, 20 mins is a 'grace' period and not where the cinavia is, normal re-encoding isn't going to shift it etc. It's just a suggestion but might stop some of the same questions being asked several times :)

Carpo

12th February 2011, 06:05

Ghitulescu

12th February 2011, 07:52

Carpo

12th February 2011, 07:59

As long as cinavia is not removed it would remain inthere and as such it would trigger sometimes in the future when the PC too must obey this detection. The only hope is that cinavia will be cracked until then.

do you mean with the rip to mkv? I am guessing that as you say will need to keep the cinavia crap on the full back up

xenex

12th February 2011, 11:19

At this point, there is NO commercial PC-software based player that will detect Cinavia or react to it. That includes PowerDVD, WinDVD, or TMT. As well, none of the open-source media players detect it, and they never will.

That would include VLC, Totem, MPC, MPC-HC, and etc.

As has been noted, the PS3 and a "few" - very few - standalone hardware players react to Cinavia. I'd recommend not purchasing the ones that do have detection. Its the least one can do.

SamuriHL

12th February 2011, 14:54

So just to see if i have this right, if i want to play any cinava infected film on any player that supports it i have to use dvdfab to make the back up, if i just want to back it up to an mkv to play on the pc i just have to convert the hd audio to standard ac3 or dts and im good to go?

Why convert the audio? I backup all my movies to MKV format and play them with MPC-HC/ffdshow. Full bitstreaming, no Cinavia. :)

SamuriHL

12th February 2011, 14:55

As long as cinavia is not removed it would remain inthere and as such it would trigger sometimes in the future when the PC too must obey this detection. The only hope is that cinavia will be cracked until then.

Open source software on the PC is *NEVER* going to implement Cinavia. So, if you want MKV playback, regardless of whether Cinavia is embedded in the audio track, it's really not an issue.

Carpo

12th February 2011, 18:19

Why convert the audio? I backup all my movies to MKV format and play them with MPC-HC/ffdshow. Full bitstreaming, no Cinavia. :)

Mainly due to the fact that some of the audio i have seen is in excess of 3gb, thaat and storage space was an issue at the time and i have got into a routine with backing up my discs.

Are you saying that you keep the dts-hd and true-hd audio when you backup your discs?

SamuriHL

12th February 2011, 18:21

Mainly due to the fact that some of the audio i have seen is in excess of 3gb, thaat and storage space was an issue at the time and i have got into a routine with backing up my discs.

Are you saying that you keep the dts-hd and true-hd audio when you backup your discs?

Yes, I keep the HD audio tracks in my backups. MKV is a pretty efficient container and is slightly smaller than m2ts. Regardless of whether or not it has Cinavia, I can always play my MKV backups by using MPC-HC. Cinavia is inert on such a setup.

dwrbudr

13th February 2011, 09:43

What about hardware players like WD-TV, ASUS, etc.? Do you think they will "adopt" cinavia?

Ghitulescu

13th February 2011, 13:40

Open source software on the PC is *NEVER* going to implement Cinavia. So, if you want MKV playback, regardless of whether Cinavia is embedded in the audio track, it's really not an issue.

I was not talking about open source or more generally about the application layer. Cinavia detection can be implemented in SO layer (sort of DirectX API), or in the drivers of the audiocard (the cretification procedure may include this requirement), or even in the FW of the audiocard. Supposingly one would use the digital output (to bypasss several hurdles), maybe the FW of the AVR would include cinavia detection, and the horror scenarios may go on....

SamuriHL

13th February 2011, 13:56

I was not talking about open source or more generally about the application layer. Cinavia detection can be implemented in SO layer (sort of DirectX API), or in the drivers of the audiocard (the cretification procedure may include this requirement), or even in the FW of the audiocard. Supposingly one would use the digital output (to bypasss several hurdles), maybe the FW of the AVR would include cinavia detection, and the horror scenarios may go on....

Um, yea, sure. :rolleyes: I've asked this question before to people who insist on spreading this kind of FUD. How is an audio card, AVR, etc supposed to know that the Cinavia infected disc that's being played is an original or not? The player removes AACS before sending it to any of those devices. So even if they somehow add detection in those external devices, they're not able to authenticate whether it's an original or not. There is also no mechanism for those devices to ask the player nicely, either. And let's say they did. You buy, let's say, an AVR that supposedly knows how to detect Cinavia in an audio stream, but, you have an older BD player that doesn't support Cinavia detection. So the AVR detects Cinavia, but, the AACS is removed, so, it has no way of knowing whether you're playing an original or a backup. Regardless of what "devices" support Cinavia detection, at the end of the day, the *PLAYER* must be the one that controls whether it's a trusted source or not. Period.

Ghitulescu

13th February 2011, 15:34

The PC is not a trusted source. Also period.

SamuriHL

13th February 2011, 15:36

So, you're saying the PC is not allowed to play commercial blu-rays?

Ghitulescu

13th February 2011, 15:50

No**, I said that if cinavia was designed to survive reencoding (or in other words to be played on devices that do not have to obey AACS*), it means that all the players would eventually be "cinavia-infected". Since this won't affect one's own audio score, it won't hurt anything. It can thus be implemented on pro gear, too.

Additional point: since one can film a wedding where the music is not licenced to be played, this too would activate cinavia on playback ()cinavia is supposed to survive analog conversions, too). That's the world according to cinavia.

That's why I said that both an intermediate and a definitive solution is needed, the intermediate is needed NOW, because it will work NOW.

*AACS is just a method to force some manufacturers to implement certain features. Similar restrictions apply for various other types of products (like HD SAT receivers).

**Somehow, yes. Remember that all the copyright protections generally try to prevent the use of CD/DVD/BD on a computer. This is the problem, as the same CD/DVD/BD should play on a standalone, which sometimes employs PC components (like PC drives).

SamuriHL

13th February 2011, 16:14

All COMMERCIAL players on the PC will be Cinavia infected. That's because they are bound by their license agreement with the AACS-LA. We agree on that. But there is no way they can force open source players to implement it. They can only force their licensees to implement it. Hence, any backup I make as an MKV will always play fine in an open source player like MPC-HC/ffdshow. Without the worry of Cinavia.

Ghitulescu

13th February 2011, 16:42

I agree, but this is one simplistic, single-sided view. You missed the real point under * of above.
The people behind AACS were the same (more or less) as those behind CSS and so on. HD-DVD failed because the studios decided its protection is too weak. No HD-DVD-only supporter owned a studio at the time.
It's called AACS for BD, it's called HD+/CI+ for SAT, it's called PCxx for PCs, everything that touches the interests of media concerns would have to be somehow "certified" and this certification would eventually imply this item, sometimes nicely hidden behind pompous words (for public documents).

SamuriHL

13th February 2011, 17:11

Yea, I get it. But, for the context of this thread, we're discussing Cinavia. New protections could be made to do all the scary bad things you're suggesting. However, in terms of Cinavia, then no. It's limited to being an embedded signal on an audio track that is then detected by the player. The player is instructed to determine if the content is from a trusted source. In the case of DVD's and Blu-ray's, they check for an AACS certificate to see if it's a valid, original disc. If the player doesn't contain Cinavia checking code, then the protection is rather useless. (A slightly off topic rant....this is what the studios get for allowing a half baked standard like BD to "win"....if it's constantly evolving then you have customers with older versions of a product that don't contain the newer parts of the standard. Yet, they still have to be allowed to play legally purchased content. Kind of a catch 22 when you're adding new protection mechanisms.) Anyway, yes, they could do all the things you're suggesting, but, then, that's not Cinavia. For the purposes of this thread, we have to look at what Cinavia is, and how we may defeat it.

BTW, I think some people still get me wrong when I say that companies like SlySoft and Fengtao should focus on long term removal and not short term workaround solutions. They seem to think I mean that NO ONE should focus on short term workarounds and that's not what I'm saying at all. I think if we're to ever get a long term, full removal solution, those who are capable of that should start now and focus just on that and not get distracted trying to create a workaround that can be squashed. Full removal is not a simple thing to do and is likely going to take quite a bit of time and effort. While they're focusing on long term, that opens a gap for OTHERS to come up with the workarounds as has been done. Fengtao's solution at least gives people an option to play their backups on Cinavia infected devices as long as you keep it in a BD structure. I don't have a problem with that in the least. All I've said is those that are capable of long term, full removal should focus on that, and let other people worry about the short term workarounds.

Personally, my short term work around is to use open source software for playback. That will not be forced to detect Cinavia and therefore bypasses the problem completely. That solution doesn't work for everyone.

setarip_old

13th February 2011, 23:14

Perhaps SONY will sue themselves for this one ;>} (The more "open doors" to the PS3, the greater the potential for eliminating "Cinavia")

http://forum.digital-digest.com/showthread.php?t=94543

(additional insight)

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/107640-Kevin-Butler-Accidentally-Retweets-PS3-Jailbreak-Code-to-Thousands-of-Followers

setarip_old

13th February 2011, 23:24

@SamuriHL

Hi!

Sounds like you're trying to have your cake and eat it too:

Post #746 BTW, I think some people still get me wrong when I say that companies like SlySoft and Fengtao should focus on long term removal and not short term workaround solutions.

Post #582 The short term is pointless other than for academic reasons.

Post #600 Yes, it will show the AACSLA that their protection attempts are futile and force them to plug the holes. So, I guess the "keep em busy" strategy isn't a bad one. Just so long as the right people are working on the right solutions.

tripmaster

14th February 2011, 00:39

Personally, my short term work around is to use open source software for playback. That will not be forced to detect Cinavia and therefore bypasses the problem completely. That solution doesn't work for everyone.

My short term solution is to stream my compressed version to my Xbox360. It forces me to use it as a media extender, which I dont do. But it does work in the short term.

SamuriHL

14th February 2011, 01:14

@SamuriHL

Hi!

Sounds like you're trying to have your cake and eat it too:

Nope. The short term solutions are fine until they get fixed. Hence why they're called "short term". So far, we've not seen any evidence of Cinavia evolving as short term solutions are found. However, it seems very likely that they will plug the holes. Therefore, I repeat, short term solutions are fine for, well, the short term. Longer term, we want it removed. And for that to happen, someone needs to work on that. If they're busy devising short term solutions, they won't have enough time to work on removing it. I fail to see why that concept is difficult to understand. This isn't something that's going to get dealt with in a day, week, or even month. Someone needs to really rip this thing apart and figure out how to get rid of it once and for all.

SamuriHL

14th February 2011, 01:16

My short term solution is to stream my compressed version to my Xbox360. It forces me to use it as a media extender, which I dont do. But it does work in the short term.

Neat. You lose HD audio doing it that way, but, nonetheless, that seems like a valid method if you don't mind that one drawback.

Mug Funky

14th February 2011, 02:59

a thought occurs to me.

there's two ways to analyse the audio to find watermarks.

1. try to find an example of audio+watermark and clean audio, then look for the differences.

2. gather together all the cinavia sources we can find, and see what's the same about them.

even something as simplistic as averaging them all together (with some attempts to sync by cutting based on when the message is triggered) might reveal something useful - we regard the audio itself as "noise" and try to reduce it by averaging with many different soundtracks.

no doubt there'd be a random starting offset when the watermarking kicks in, but i think enough trying and we might find something.

arctor

17th February 2011, 00:10

Off-topic I know but is it possible that this will make its way into the DAC's and Driver of the Sound Cards?

So the drivers/dac/ Windows sound API could stop playback if Cinavia is detected and the AACS certificate is not passed in with the source.

That would defeat Open Source playback, (unless you were using Open Source drivers which didn't check that)

Realistically it is probably too much of a major change to get this end to end (from Source to Playback hardware) but it might be the next step they start looking at. The other thing that I can see is that the more components that need to implement this the more information about it will leak out.

[QUOTE=SamuriHL;1477866]Yea, I get it. But, for the context of this thread, we're discussing Cinavia. New protections could be made to do all the scary bad things you're suggesting. However, in terms of Cinavia, then no. It's limited to being an embedded signal on an audio track that is then detected by the player. The player is instructed to determine if the content is from a trusted source. In the case of DVD's and Blu-ray's, they check for an AACS certificate to see if it's a valid, original disc. If the player doesn't contain Cinavia checking code, then the protection is rather useless. QUOTE]

SamuriHL

17th February 2011, 00:32

Off-topic I know but is it possible that this will make its way into the DAC's and Driver of the Sound Cards?

So the drivers/dac/ Windows sound API could stop playback if Cinavia is detected and the AACS certificate is not passed in with the source.

That would defeat Open Source playback, (unless you were using Open Source drivers which didn't check that)

Realistically it is probably too much of a major change to get this end to end (from Source to Playback hardware) but it might be the next step they start looking at. The other thing that I can see is that the more components that need to implement this the more information about it will leak out.

I'm gonna ask again. HOW does the "sound api" know that? Any time someone wants to bring up this kind of nonsense, I'm gonna keep asking the same question until it gets through to people. HOW does anything besides the player that's reading the physical disc know whether there's a valid AACS certificate? And with an open source player, the AACS stuff is removed before it ever gets to the player. (Same with commercial players on my machine....I use AnyDVD to remove the protection in realtime...the commercial players all get unprotected discs.) Unless the "sound api" has some mechanism to read from the original disc and verify the AACS certificate after detecting Cinavia in the audio stream, thus bypassing the player, it's not possible to do what's being suggested. At least not without some major work to the OS. I don't mean to be a PITA on answering this. It's just that I wish people would think it through a little bit and ask themselves how something would ACTUALLY work.

Ghitulescu

17th February 2011, 09:04

I'm gonna ask again. HOW does the "sound api" know that? Any time someone wants to bring up this kind of nonsense, I'm gonna keep asking the same question until it gets through to people. HOW does anything besides the player that's reading the physical disc know whether there's a valid AACS certificate? And with an open source player, the AACS stuff is removed before it ever gets to the player. (Same with commercial players on my machine....I use AnyDVD to remove the protection in realtime...the commercial players all get unprotected discs.) .

Now it's clear for me that you didn't understand what I said before.

Cinavia is not intended for AACS certification only. As some contributors to this forum showed, there are DVDs with cinavia. AACS is only one arm of its forced implementation. As 2012 nears, more and more standards and commission bodies will implement the same or similar strategy to prevent unauthorised copying (actually the playback of copies).

Cinavia, if one reads the patents and the cinavia webpages, is designed to prevent the playback of copyrighted material ANYWHERE else than on a certain pool of playback devices, which are considered safe. It includes, as I said, even the "copyrighted" audio at parties/weddings/etc, events that have been filmed/taped (it survives, they say, the analog conversion, in this case CD/DVD/SACD/etc->AVR->Loudspeaker->air :p->camcorder mic->tape->playback device).

If one copies the "cinavied" BD/DVD onto a playback device, other than the DVD/BD-player, the whole purpose of cinavia is moot. Conversely, this way cinavia would be effective only on copies of BD/DVD played on DVD/BD players. The trend is towards mobile devices, FlashRAM players, HDD players.

Concerning the PC. Since the material is copyrighted, it doesn't need to be AACS compatible, not even to enforce an AACS detection, it simply needs to detect cinavia. A home made movie/tune will never contain cinavia, unless something is "stolen". These are able to play on a PC, it's your own material. As long as cinavia is detected, that means that AACS detected on or off, you're using copyrighted material. That's enough. And cinavia detection can be implemented not only in drivers' layer, but more dangerous in FW or HW (real chips). Hello?

xenex

17th February 2011, 10:10

I'm going to have to fully agree with SamuriHL.

Only a PLAYER device can detect and act upon Cinavia. And Cinavia detection is not something hardware manufacturers are adding happily, they are forced to by the AACS spec.

A few examples - Even if a sound card could detect the watermark - which it potentially could - HOW could it force the player to halt playback in the case of a NO_HOME_USE mark? It could not and cannot. Only a PLAYER device/software could do that.

If the audio output hardware from a TV could detect the watermark - which it potentially could - HOW would it send commands back to the PLAYER?? It cannot. It could mute the audio on any detection of the watermark, but then it would mute valid TRUSTED_SOURCE Blu-Rays and DVDs just as well, wouldn't it!!

I've even seen some 'speculation' that a receiver could act upon Cinavia! Well, as I've said, it could detect it, as could any device that decodes audio. But Cinavia has TWO PARTS. The watermarked audio itself, and a PLAYBACK DEVICE that can verify if the media is a TRUSTED_SOURCE.

So, whilst a TV, a sound card, a receiver, a media streamer, etc. could in fact detect the Cinavia watermark in an audio stream, without the 2nd part, verification of TRUSTED_SOURCE, it would not and could not make a decision as to 'mute' or 'not-mute' that audio.

And there is no way that a TV, sound card, receiver or media streamer could send a signal back to the PLAYER ITSELF. It's just impossible. Might be a good idea to read my earlier post in which I showed that the AACS agreement requires that the PLAYER DEVICE displays a CINAVIA MESSAGE.

Ghitulescu

17th February 2011, 11:19

You're unbelievable!

A. Take a BD player that plays a BD disk.
A1. The disk is original. The player sees this thing. The player detects cinavia. The disk is ok, cinavia subroutine is not called. Normal playback.
A2. The disk is a copy.
A2A. The copy is not cinavied. The player sees that the disk is a BDR/E or non-protected. The player checks for cinavia. Cinavia is not found. Normal playback.
A2B. The copy is cinavied. ---"---- -----"-----. Cinavia is found and subroutine is called.

B. Take a mediatank (mediaplayer, whatever is this thing called in your country, like WD TV Live or Popcorn Hour and similar).
B. Still B. All media files here are copies, since the originals are on the BD-ROM. If a media player has a BD drive (Oppo, Dune HD and PCH C-200 come to mind) then it's scenario A (above).
B1. media is not cinavied. The player does not call the subroutine as it may be home a made file.
B2. media is cinavied. Subroutine called.

C. PC-enabled SW player
C1. The PC doesn't have a BD drive. That is the media is a hollywood-copy or a home made
C1A. non-cinavied media play normal like usual
C1B. cinavied media. Until a file reaches the output cables (DVI/HDMI, audio) a file has to be retrieved from the HDD (OS can check in background), the file has to be decoded (drivers check in background), the digital data is sent to the corresponding output cards (audio card drivers/FW/HW check for cinavia). If cinavia is detected anywhere in this chain, provided the file is a copy, cinavia is triggered.
C2. The PC has a BD drive.
C2A. The disk is original. It's the responsability of the player to instruct both the drive and the OS that this copy is legitimate (there are several terms like PAP and stuff to describe how the signal path is checked), then play it as normal. Cinavia detected but not triggered.
C2B. The disk is a cinavied copy. Cinavia detected and triggered.

The whole issue here is to identify whether the file/disk is a copy or an unauthorised/unprotected media file or not, then if cinavia is detected the triggering subroutine is called.

How that works with a camcorder? Simply, a consumer camcorder is always unprotected, in other words it's considered as a copy. This concept is known and used since the DAT issue. A cellphone? The same. If a protection is found, whatever it may be, and cinavia is detected -> End of Story. No need for AACS (or for AACS only).

What prevents people from seeing this is that cinavia is now a test (a working test). Let's talk in 5 years.

Corolar: the only universal solution to this is to eliminate, physically, cinavia from the audio part. Partial solutions would be FW hacks, but these will work only with specific gear and can be anytime invalidated through mandatory FW upgrades (see the PS3 case).

SamuriHL

17th February 2011, 14:23

Corolar: the only universal solution to this is to eliminate, physically, cinavia from the audio part. Partial solutions would be FW hacks, but these will work only with specific gear and can be anytime invalidated through mandatory FW upgrades (see the PS3 case).

On this part, we agree. And I'm going to leave it there and call it good. :)

setarip_old

17th February 2011, 20:14

@xenex

Hi!And there is no way that a TV, sound card, receiver or media streamer could send a signal back to the PLAYER ITSELF. It's just impossible.

Although I don't necessarily agree with everything in the repetitive voluminous and speculative posts about what the future may hold for the further application of "Cinavia", a couple of things I learned many, many years ago that will always be valid:

1) Never say "Never"

and

2) What's impossible today is often solved tomorrow

A.Fenderson

17th February 2011, 20:58

...Cinavia detection is not something hardware manufacturers are adding happily, they are forced to by the AACS spec.

I think we would do well to keep in mind that simplifications like this aren't representative of the whole picture. Sony, for instance, is both a home-theater hardware manufacturer and a movie studio conglomerate--their actions prove that they believe they have much to gain from incorporating Cinavia detection into as many of their playback devices (PS3 and other BD players)--and watermarks into as many applicable forms of media (including DVDs, which to my understanding can only be an *option* for the studios, not mandated, in that the DVD Forum hasn't mandated AACS or Cinavia)--as they can, as quickly as they can.

Only those hardware manufacturers with no direct ties to the studios--and therefore arguably nothing to gain directly from Cinavia's success--would be annoyed at being forced to include Cinavia tech in their gear. Sony, though, produces HT hardware, owns a ton of movie studios, and is a founding member of AACS LA, so they obviously want to push Cinavia into their own hardware and media products.

setarip_old

17th February 2011, 23:04

As I mentioned in Post #1 when I started this thread, my equipment pre-dates "Cinavia" protection, so that I cannot directly perform any testing.

Therefore, I would repeat a suggestion/request for testing that I made in 11/20/10 Post #312 and modified in 11/21/10 Post #323:

If possible, perhaps "Cinavia" can be fooled by adding (NOT replacing) 1, 2 or even 5 blank audiostreams in superior track sequence to the original audiostreams, with the same indicated audio formats and running times as the originals...

arctor

19th February 2011, 01:50

The Sound API does not need to access the disk directly rather it needs to know that the player is a valid player that is calling it. In fact it would be quite high coupling if you enforced this. In a chain of trust, the Sound API trust everything before it and needs a mechanisim to authenticate that trust.

Possibly when the stream is passed into the SoundAPI a encrypted checksum (MAC) generated by the player is included with it. The player will only generate this checksum if the media has AACS.

In the SoundAPI this checksum is then validated and if present then the sound can be played with only a Cinavia check for the Cinema profile If non encrypted data is sent through the API then a full Cinavia check is perfromed and if detected (which implies pirated data) the sound is muted or a high pitch beep is sent through. I don't care that player cannot detect this because the player should have checked Cinavia and if it didn't you are obviously using a non certified player.

Of course you could hack the player to always send the checksum (or recover the key). What you can't do is build an opensource player unless you know this key.

Obviously this means sharing a key between the sound card API / Firmware and the players and all the management (i.e. key revocation etc) of it. This will be a major logistic headache and a challenge for the DRM designer out there. Here your major OS changes you mentioned will need to happen. Will this happen, I don't think so but that doesn't mean its not possible.

Cinavia's ability to securly encode in the audio the fact the audio is copyrighted and should be validated is quite impressive. The challenge for the DRM designers will be to ensure components in the chain can perform that authentication without compromising the security.

I'm gonna ask again. HOW does the "sound api" know that? Any time someone wants to bring up this kind of nonsense, I'm gonna keep asking the same question until it gets through to people. HOW does anything besides the player that's reading the physical disc know whether there's a valid AACS certificate? And with an open source player, the AACS stuff is removed before it ever gets to the player. (Same with commercial players on my machine....I use AnyDVD to remove the protection in realtime...the commercial players all get unprotected discs.) Unless the "sound api" has some mechanism to read from the original disc and verify the AACS certificate after detecting Cinavia in the audio stream, thus bypassing the player, it's not possible to do what's being suggested. At least not without some major work to the OS. I don't mean to be a PITA on answering this. It's just that I wish people would think it through a little bit and ask themselves how something would ACTUALLY work.

SamuriHL

19th February 2011, 02:03

The problem with that is that you are forcing people to update their player in order to play original discs. That is not the case as of today. So that's a fairly significant change and consumers will NOT be happy with it. You might say the studios won't care, but, they will if the backlash is loud enough. It's one thing to implement a protection technology in new players. It's quite another to enforce it by requiring the consumer update their software/hardware in order to play a disc.

Ghitulescu

19th February 2011, 08:39

The problem with that is that you are forcing people to update their player in order to play original discs. That is not the case as of today. So that's a fairly significant change and consumers will NOT be happy with it.

Do you actually own a BD player?
One in two or three disks actually displays a warning about my player which needs upgraded to watch the disk. My player is now 2 years old but still plays the latest disks, well, I missed some 5 updates. All the new disks come at least in Germany with an additional flyer that states the same DO UPGRADE YOUR PLAYER TO THE LATEST STAND.

Most consumers simply do not care about it*. My experience with FW upgrade for the past 18 years says that, while at the beginning the FW upgrade was a bonus, see TEAC and Yamaha two companies that really tried to improve their products, today the FW is the key to restrict the digital freedom. The turning point was to my experience the SD2.5 case. Since then I recommend anyone to do whatever he can to resist upgrading.

*And even if they do notice a degradation in its capability they are left with no alternative (the other equivalent gear is equally infected).

SamuriHL

19th February 2011, 14:33

Do you actually own a BD player?
One in two or three disks actually displays a warning about my player which needs upgraded to watch the disk. My player is now 2 years old but still plays the latest disks, well, I missed some 5 updates. All the new disks come at least in Germany with an additional flyer that states the same DO UPGRADE YOUR PLAYER TO THE LATEST STAND.

Most consumers simply do not care about it*. My experience with FW upgrade for the past 18 years says that, while at the beginning the FW upgrade was a bonus, see TEAC and Yamaha two companies that really tried to improve their products, today the FW is the key to restrict the digital freedom. The turning point was to my experience the SD2.5 case. Since then I recommend anyone to do whatever he can to resist upgrading.

*And even if they do notice a degradation in its capability they are left with no alternative (the other equivalent gear is equally infected).

So ALL BD players that have ever been made are upgradable to even the first version of Cinavia detection through a FW udpate? Cause otherwise, you're FORCING customers to spend money on new equipment just to watch movies. Something that they have not done yet. Even a first gen BD player can play the latest discs. They just don't get all the functionality. That would not be the case if you can't update every single BD player sold since day 1 to this uber secure Cinavia methodology. And as I said before, forcing customers to BUY a new player just to watch a standard they bought into....that's going to create a backlash.

Ghitulescu

19th February 2011, 15:53

The Blu-ray certification for a player imposes the manufacturer, among other thing, that the player be FW upgradable. They learned the DVD lesson. So they will force the player to update to keep it up with the newest protections. So all BD players will be capable of implementing cinavia, since this is a software thing. As soon as one cinavia form has been hacked, they will update the players to the next combination.

How to force? SImply, they launched the campaign of UPDATE OR YOUR PLAYER WON'T WORK (which is not really true) and of course the BD-Live players would automatically update themselves (this is why I have a BonusView one). If this doesn't work, they have the second choice, the deliberately provide the player with a beta FW and they will provide both the enhancement (for my player it would have been DTS MA, for others it may be the 3D thing) and the bitter pill. According to one manufacturer (I will not mention its name for obvious reasons) the implementation of Cinavia should be, according to NDA agreements, not be made public. In other words, they won't mention the introduction of cinavia in the FW log. And even more, once such methods are implemented, no possibility exists to revert to an earlier version (that's the best indication that something wrong has been done to your device). Now the billion dollar question: why it wasn't introduced from the beginning (as cinavia is protected since 2005)? Well, the first rule of marketing is to reach the "turning point" - if all players have been infected, people would have been realised the danger, and the BD issue would have been a stillborn. The old gear will nevertheless disappear and the circle will be completely closed.

Is this another conspiracy theory? Nope, this is the reality. Wellcome to the Digital Age!

SamuriHL

19th February 2011, 16:08

I'm not sure I agree with the assertion that any player can be made to check for Cinavia through a firmware update. The older players may not be physically capable of checking for Cinavia. This is a point that's been debated quite heavily and no one has any real idea of whether it can be done or not. This whole "super cinavia" scenario that was outlined a few posts ago that relies on something from the player being passed to an audio driver or receiver requires that every single player out there support it. Otherwise, consumers won't be able to play their original discs. I know the AACS-LA has required that player mfg'd after a certain date all have the required capability to support Cinavia. That suggests, perhaps, that players previous to that cutoff date may not have the ability to be updated to support it. Otherwise, why the stated cutoff date? Again, that's not PROOF of anything and could just be a licensing thing for all I know. But, unless you can get Cinavia on EVERY single player in existence, then it's going to HAVE to be optional and only apply to players that support it. And that being the case, open source players are safe as there's absolutely no way to tell an original from a backup once it leaves the player unless the player is required to implement some methodology for doing so. *IF* you can update every player with Cinavia, and somehow can force all customers to upgrade to a firmware that supports it, then yes, you could force Cinavia on every single device and not allow players that don't implement it. I don't consider that scenario very likely.

setarip_old

19th February 2011, 18:55

@SamuriHL

Hi! I know the AACS-LA has required that player mfg'd after a certain date all have the required capability to support Cinavia. That suggests, perhaps, that players previous to that cutoff date may not have the ability to be updated to support it. Otherwise, why the stated cutoff date?Simply, the "cutoff"/start date was predicated upon the date that the Verance/"Cinavia" concept was approved for mandatory inclusion by AACS-LA...

SamuriHL

19th February 2011, 18:56

@SamuriHL

Hi! Simply, the "cutoff"/start date was predicated upon the date that the Verance/"Cinavia" concept was approved for mandatory inclusion by AACS-LA...

Sure, but, that doesn't either confirm or deny whether OLD players can be updated to handle Cinavia through a simple FW change.

Ghitulescu

19th February 2011, 19:02

setarip_old

19th February 2011, 19:27

that doesn't either confirm or deny whether OLD players can be updated to handle Cinavia through a simple FW change. No it doesn't - and that's quite intentional, as there's nothing to be gained by speculating about that.

I've only answered the one question you asked for which there is a factual response.

On the other hand, I still think it would be beneficial if someone with Verance/"Cinavia"-infected equipment could test to see if perhaps "Cinavia" can be fooled by adding (NOT replacing) 1, 2 or even 5 blank audiostreams in superior track sequence to the original audiostreams, with the same indicated audio formats and running times as the originals...

SamuriHL

19th February 2011, 19:34

On the other hand, I still think it would be beneficial if someone with Verance/"Cinavia"-infected equipment could test to see if perhaps "Cinavia" can be fooled by adding (NOT replacing) 1, 2 or even 5 blank audiostreams in superior track sequence to the original audiostreams, with the same indicated audio formats and running times as the originals...

How would that fool Cinavia, exactly? It checks the audio track that's being played, so, what would this accomplish? I don't know how one would go about making those tracks, so, I have no way of testing that.

Rich86

19th February 2011, 21:15

Cinavia is a SW algorithm. It doesn't require a HW chip. That older players cannot be made to check for cinavia is mainly due to their age and the manufacturers don't want to invest more man-hours in developing such a FW. Besides they are not even required to do so. So why bother.

As I said, let's talk in 5 years.

Even with cinavia being a software based check - it must require processing capability and resources to operate. Standalone players do not have internal processors of the same caliber and power as a game system like the PS3, for example.
Might this constant checking of the audio stream have a negative impact on the player's performance? Isn't there the potential danger of audio/video dropouts, etc. when the player is crunching whatever it crunches to see if it wants to permit you to hear the audio on the title you are playing?

SamuriHL

19th February 2011, 21:19

Ronin-7

20th February 2011, 18:20

Even with cinavia being a software based check - it must require processing capability and resources to operate. Standalone players do not have internal processors of the same caliber and power as a game system like the PS3, for example.
Might this constant checking of the audio stream have a negative impact on the player's performance? Isn't there the potential danger of audio/video dropouts, etc. when the player is crunching whatever it crunches to see if it wants to permit you to hear the audio on the title you are playing?

Cinavia support is being added to the Sigma 8642 series through an SDK update so certain equipment (http://www.iboum.com/net-media-players.php?sort=sortrating&chip=sig4&pfilt=&hdd=&net=&fan=&lcd=&esata=&dts=&dtsp=&dolbt=&dolbtp=&dtsma=&dtsmap=&year=&ppp=40&bd=&dvd=&netflix=&dvbt=&dweb=&multi=&stream=&sparam=&ikey=&pg=1&rp=csigma4) will be capable of receiving Cinavia.

Netgear's Blu-ray capable network media player the NeoTV550 it seems will be the first to get updated (http://www.anandtech.com/show/4110/netgear-ces-2011/2) although Netgear have said they will issue a warning informing users that the update contains Cinavia and the firmware update will be optional but I cant imagine their being any non-Cinavia updates after that.

I'm guessing all future Blu-ray capable Sigma Designs platforms will support Cinavia, though Sigma have a get of jail free card through XBMC which they are porting to their next gen chipset (http://xbmc.org/theuni/2011/01/12/more-about-sigma/) so XBMC will ignore Cinavia.

Ghitulescu

20th February 2011, 19:00

In order to do the Cinavia check, the player must (in realtime) decode the audio track, perform the Cinavia check algo, while simultaneously outputting the track either through bitstreaming or LPCM. One would think that some players might get a bit stressed by that, yes.

I don't have access to Blu-ray book, however Sony, one of its promoters said that decoding audio in player is mandatory for those players that are BonusView and up (BD-Live). I can only assume that the only players not capable of doing this, from the HW point of view, are those of the first generation.

Cinavia support is being added to the Sigma 8642 series through an SDK update so certain equipment (http://www.iboum.com/net-media-players.php?sort=sortrating&chip=sig4&pfilt=&hdd=&net=&fan=&lcd=&esata=&dts=&dtsp=&dolbt=&dolbtp=&dtsma=&dtsmap=&year=&ppp=40&bd=&dvd=&netflix=&dvbt=&dweb=&multi=&stream=&sparam=&ikey=&pg=1&rp=csigma4) will be capable of receiving Cinavia.

Netgear's Blu-ray capable network media player the NeoTV550 it seems will be the first to get updated (http://www.anandtech.com/show/4110/netgear-ces-2011/2) although Netgear have said they will issue a warning informing users that the update contains Cinavia and the firmware update will be optional but I cant imagine their being any non-Cinavia updates after that.

As I said the agreements they sign contain the clause that this addition should not be made public, exactly to prevent what you said. I'll watch Netgears' statements with a close eye.

SamuriHL

20th February 2011, 19:09

I don't have access to Blu-ray book, however Sony, one of its promoters said that decoding audio in player is mandatory for those players that are BonusView and up (BD-Live). I can only assume that the only players not capable of doing this, from the HW point of view, are those of the first generation.

Very possible. My dad still has a gen 1 player, so, I can honestly say that if Cinavia became mandatory, he'd be pretty....upset. :) That being said, eventually, those gen 1 players are going to die off, and with some new players being under 100 bucks USD, it's only a matter of time. I just don't know when/if they'll make Cinavia mandatory for every device in the chain. We will have to wait and see for that.

Sinatrafan

22nd February 2011, 23:12

SamuriHL

22nd February 2011, 23:18

Definitely not, no.

rotty

23rd February 2011, 01:42

I have a question. I dunno if this is even possible. Can a Blu Ray disc that has the Cinevia infection, when played back on any Blu Ray player, also INFECT that Blu Ray player? (like Sony's Rootkit?)

In other words, can that Blu Ray disc AUTOMATICALLY install the Cinevia (universal) firmware when played back on any Blu ray player, so that the Blu Ray Player will become infected as well, without our knowledge ? This is a horrifying thought !

Yes that would be horrifying, I have never heard of firmware updates being implimented via the played media.

BUT the following would be at least possible:
If say you owned a new or newish player, and the player does not exhibit Cinavia detection firmware, it still could be the case that in fact the player is fully Cinavia firmware ready right now but switched off.

In other words, all it needs is a command to switch it on, (not firmware update) just a trigger. This trigger could be a future batch of disks, both DVD or BD. The trigger could even be the title names or volume ID. The sick irony of course is that the trigger disk(s) could be Cinavia free themselves.

Now im not saying that this is the case at all but it is perfectly possible in theory. I just have a devious mind.

So these lists of players said to be Cinavia firmware free at present until update may not be Cinavia firmware free at all. Somebody that has a newish player and is relying on the player being safe by not updating could still be unsafe.

Why would this be done, why not just have the player Cinavia firmware switched on right now, well I can think of many many reasons cant you.

setarip_old

23rd February 2011, 03:06

@Sinatrafan

Hi! In other words, can that Blu Ray disc AUTOMATICALLY install the Cinevia (universal) firmware when played back on any Blu ray player, so that the Blu Ray Player will become infected as well, without our knowledge?

Contrary to the absolute statement made by "SamuriHL", I'd suggest to you that, thusfar, no one has publicly established that anything exists to preclude that possibility.

SamuriHL

23rd February 2011, 03:09

I give up. I really do...

Ghitulescu

23rd February 2011, 08:38

xenex

23rd February 2011, 11:35

I give up. I really do...
I can certainly see why you would feel that way. This thread has gone from the sublime to the ridiculous.

... thusfar, no one has publicly established that anything exists to preclude that possibility.
Given this logic, it is equally possible that a new firmware update will make your Blu-ray player emit flying purple gorilla-bats that fly around your house and eat all of your backup media. After all, no one has publicly established that it is not a possibility.

Can we all get back down to Earth and deal with facts, please? In the entire history of Blu-ray to date, has there ever been a (movie) disc that "silently updates" the firmware of any player? I'm fairly certain the answer is NO.

Has there ever been a (movie) disc that has even included an "optional" firmware update for any player? Again, I believe the answer would be NO.

Even when "Avatar" came out and did require some players to be updated, mostly Samsung players as I remember, those updates were supplied by Samsung themselves and required specific user intervention to install.

As a point of fact, in the many years that I have been using computers and electronic devices, I cannot recall even one instance in which any device has been "silently updated." Can anyone here name such an instance?

Correct me if I am wrong.

derbeDeus

23rd February 2011, 12:09

I can certainly see why you would feel that way. This thread has gone from the sublime to the ridiculous.

Given this logic, it is equally possible that a new firmware update will make your Blu-ray player emit flying purple gorilla-bats that fly around your house and eat all of your backup media. After all, no one has publicly established that it is not a possibility.

Can we all get back down to Earth and deal with facts, please? In the entire history of Blu-ray to date, has there ever been a (movie) disc that "silently updates" the firmware of any player? I'm fairly certain the answer is NO.

Has there ever been a (movie) disc that has even included an "optional" firmware update for any player? Again, I believe the answer would be NO.

Even when "Avatar" came out and did require some players to be updated, mostly Samsung players as I remember, those updates were supplied by Samsung themselves and required specific user intervention to install.

As a point of fact, in the many years that I have been using computers and electronic devices, I cannot recall even one instance in which any device has been "silently updated." Can anyone here name such an instance?

Correct me if I am wrong.

Yes, let's get back to Earth and use facts to give an answer.
Cinavia watermarked blu-rays that come from Sony (ie. all, but The Losers) also include a PS3 firmware update file. That is 3.15 for initial batch and then The Social Network and Burlesque come with 3.50.
PS3 won't allow the playback of such discs, unless you apply the update. The update won't tell you that you "get Cinavia detector" if you apply it, but it is your choice to install it or not.
So there is no silently "infection" without your consent, but otoh you're forced to do it in order to play the movie, and when you give your consent to install the firmware you don't know what you just did ;)
The only solution here is to make a backup of the disc without the PS3 update file. (Of course we are talking here about a console that was not "infected", ie. a PS3 with firmware prior to 3.10).

Ghitulescu

23rd February 2011, 12:15

Cinavia watermarked blu-rays that come from Sony (ie. all, but The Losers) also include a PS3 firmware update file. That is 3.15 for initial batch and then The Social Network and Burlesque come with 3.50.
PS3 won't allow the playback of such discs, unless you apply the update. The update won't tell you that you "get Cinavia detector" if you apply it, but it is your choice to install it or not.
So there is no silently "infection" without your consent, but otoh you're forced to do it in order to play the movie, and when you give your consent to install the firmware you don't know what you just did ;)

Exactly.

setarip_old

23rd February 2011, 17:13

rotty

23rd February 2011, 21:59

@derbeDeus

Thank you for setting the record straight regarding the current state of affairs. That type of "coerced cooperation" will likely raise far less consumer rage than did the heinous, secretive Sony-type "rootkit" of the past.

However, with 50Gb to "play with" on a Blu-ray disc, there's certainly plenty of space available for entertainment media providers to create all sorts of never-before-done mischief.

On the other hand, as I've suggested previously, one can hopefully look forward to the recent hack of the PS3 yielding a permanent solution to the Verance/"Cinavia" protection.

Yep and what if as I said earlier, the newer players do not need to be updated to have full Cinavia detection, what if the firmware for that is already in the player and not yet enabled.

You would only need to change one bit (a boolean flag) to enable Cinavia. You wouldnt need any of the 50GB disk space, just a little bit of Java or as I said the firmware could be looking for certain titles of the new disks yet to be released and this could change the flag bit and BOOM, Cinavia is ON.

Wouldnt even need to be a watermarked disk that does it.

I really dont think its that far fetched.

Vurbal

24th February 2011, 16:27

Yep and what if as I said earlier, the newer players do not need to be updated to have full Cinavia detection, what if the firmware for that is already in the player and not yet enabled.

You would only need to change one bit (a boolean flag) to enable Cinavia. You wouldnt need any of the 50GB disk space, just a little bit of Java or as I said the firmware could be looking for certain titles of the new disks yet to be released and this could change the flag bit and BOOM, Cinavia is ON.

Wouldnt even need to be a watermarked disk that does it.

I really dont think its that far fetched.
I think it's extremely far fetched for a number of reasons. For starters, it assumes a level of rational thinking that's completely incompatible with how DRM obsessed content owners and distributors think. Their entire mindset screams "we need maximum DRM in place and it needs to be there immediately." Their only reason for being sneaky about DRM is plausible deniability. "No Mr. Consumer, it's not our fault your Blu-ray player won't play what it did yesterday. Talk to the manufacturer."

The scenario you describe would result in exactly the opposite effect. If things change after putting a disc in, most people won't be cursing the player manufacturer. It will be the distributor or studio behind the disc. On top of that, if something gets screwed up because of whatever code they used to enable the new "feature," they'll also have player manufacturers pointing fingers at them. They have nothing to gain (even from their twisted POV) and everything to lose by taking on that responsibility.

Player manufacturers also have significant incentive to oppose such a scheme. Every time you push out another firmware update you run the risk of causing unforeseen problems. If you count on a third party to make even a small change to it correctly, the risk grows exponentially. If that third party is a company whose expertise is something only tangentially related to your product, as is the case with Blu-ray authoring and player firmware, the risk increases even further.

It's one thing for Sony to include an update for Sony hardware on their discs. It's another entirely for Sony (or anyone else) to include updates for some other company's player. It adds layers of complication and uncertainty that no one wants and makes studios responsible for things they clearly believe are the job of anyone and everyone besides them. While such an arrangement might seem sensible for someone who has thoroughly thought the process through, belief in DRM isn't the result of rational analysis. It's all about blind faith.

Ghitulescu

24th February 2011, 16:49

So who cares? I mean whether the guilt is with the manufacturer or with the disk issuer? How can s/he solve this? Downgrade? Well, no, this is equally mentioned in the BD specs, so in the end the manufacturer will be considered guilty, too. I still remember the old days when my uncle hit the TV because the tape in the VCR was broken. I don't really think that most consumers today are smarter than the consumer of 20 years ago. I also had hard times not earlier than 10 years ago to explain a bookkeeper where is the software we bought for the company, he couldn't conceive we paid money for something he couldn't see.

The second run: how to solve the problem? Is Sony guilty for sneaking cinavia in? Pick Samsung? Not again, cinavia here, too. Maybe LG? Panasonic? Because, by the time cinavia will hit one brand it will hit all of them. So not much of a choice.

Third run: how to solve the problem? Pick a mediaplayer with no BD drive (so no AACS certification). I think people forgot the RIAA vs. Sony DAT case - Sony was threatened to be brought to court even if the apparatuses could not, at the time, digitally copy the protected works (there were no commercial DATs) and analog copies were allowed under the Home Recording Act. The same for today, not implementing cinavia would mean for the manufacturers of such players the risk of being on trial for "accessory to crime" - facilitating the copying.

Welcome (again) in the digital age!

Vurbal

24th February 2011, 16:58

Ghitulescu

24th February 2011, 17:09

Was that a response to what I posted? If so, I'm confused about what point you think you're addressing.

Point 1 - manufacturers cannot resist
Point 2 - the user will not inherently blame the studios
Point 3 - I don't care what Sony does, all the manufacturers will eventually do the same thing

Vurbal

24th February 2011, 17:25

Point 1 - manufacturers cannot resist
Of course they can.
Point 2 - the user will not inherently blame the studios
You're certainly entitled to your opinion. My experience in various customer service related positions shows otherwise.
Point 3 - I don't care what Sony does, all the manufacturers will eventually do the same thing
All the other studios can't do the same thing unless they're also going to buy consumer electronics or game console manufacturers.

Ghitulescu

24th February 2011, 18:01

Of course they can.

You're certainly entitled to your opinion. My experience in various customer service related positions shows otherwise.

All the other studios can't do the same thing unless they're also going to buy consumer electronics or game console manufacturers.

All three points are unfortunately valid.
There are several ways to force the manufacturers to obey the requests. One is to impose standards, other is to use the law (lobby), there are more levers to do a thing...
You'll find out only the opinion of the people that care and their opinions reached the customer service. It's not very wise to generalize this.
Point 3 is related to point 1.

Vurbal

24th February 2011, 19:37

All three points are unfortunately valid.
They're opinions, and as I say you're entitled to yours. However they are not facts, which is how you seem to view them.
There are several ways to force the manufacturers to obey the requests. One is to impose standards, other is to use the law (lobby), there are more levers to do a thing...
And there are many ways for manufacturers to resist, which is the reason we have things like the completely private and contractually based implementation of Blu-ray DRM. In any case, whether they will get what they want in the form of unspecified future legislation is completely unrelated to what their plans are under the current law and licensing agreements. If you wish to have a conversation speculating about future DRM, you should start a new thread to see if anyone's interested. I have no intention of being drawn into a discussion of it in this one.
You'll find out only the opinion of the people that care and their opinions reached the customer service. It's not very wise to generalize this.
What you'll find out is the opinion of the people who are upset. However, history backs me up on this. When people get discs which cause them problems they don't complain about the player. They complain about the disc. It has already happened multiple times with Blu-ray. And since you give no authority for your opinion I'll continue to rely on my experience, thank you very much.
Point 3 is related to point 1.
And ignores completely the fact that all Sony has done is send out an update for their own hardware. While technically all major studios have done this already, Sony being the only one also making players, it merely highlights the fact that Sony is, and will continue to be, different than the rest.

Going back to Cinavia specifically, if it were going to be "turned on" in compatible players in this manner it would almost certainly have happened either before the first Cinavia disc was released or as part of the first releases. Especially considering Sony's history. Since it didn't, conjecture that it will happen in the future without more evidence than "Sony included a PS3 update with their Cinavia infected discs" is hard to take seriously.

SamuriHL

25th February 2011, 04:48

Sony is unique in that they can force consumers to accept firmwae updates or else be cutoff from online activities. The ps3 is not really a stand alone in the traditional sense. Forced updates on actual stand alones hasn't been done to my knowledge. It's unlikely to happen as firmware isn't generic between players. Again, the ps3 being a special case.

setarip_old

25th February 2011, 08:34

Actually, it looks like SONY is really no longer in a position to force much of anything since the PS3 "jailbreak".

The latest "Oh no you don't SONY" apparently is a hack that allows users to UN-ban their consoles.

As I've stated in several previous posts pertaining to the "jailbreak" itself, and the subsequent hacks:

Although this is not Verance/"Cinavia"-specific, it seems only logical that now that the PS3 is wide open to manipulation, someone will eventually make use of this as part or all of the means to permanently eliminate the present "Cinavia" protection. Keeping in mind that the PS3 appears to include far and away the single most prevalent hardware Blu-ray player (I believe it's outsold all other players combined), just defeating "Cinavia" only on the PS3 would be a heck of a shot across the bow of AACS, Verance, et al.

Ghitulescu

25th February 2011, 09:26

They're opinions, and as I say you're entitled to yours. However they are not facts, which is how you seem to view them.

And there are many ways for manufacturers to resist, which is the reason we have things like the completely private and contractually based implementation of Blu-ray DRM. In any case, whether they will get what they want in the form of unspecified future legislation is completely unrelated to what their plans are under the current law and licensing agreements. If you wish to have a conversation speculating about future DRM, you should start a new thread to see if anyone's interested. I have no intention of being drawn into a discussion of it in this one.

What you'll find out is the opinion of the people who are upset. However, history backs me up on this. When people get discs which cause them problems they don't complain about the player. They complain about the disc. It has already happened multiple times with Blu-ray. And since you give no authority for your opinion I'll continue to rely on my experience, thank you very much.

And ignores completely the fact that all Sony has done is send out an update for their own hardware. While technically all major studios have done this already, Sony being the only one also making players, it merely highlights the fact that Sony is, and will continue to be, different than the rest.

Going back to Cinavia specifically, if it were going to be "turned on" in compatible players in this manner it would almost certainly have happened either before the first Cinavia disc was released or as part of the first releases. Especially considering Sony's history. Since it didn't, conjecture that it will happen in the future without more evidence than "Sony included a PS3 update with their Cinavia infected discs" is hard to take seriously.

Is everyone here blind?

How can one rely on a DRM scheme (ie cinavia) that requires a lot of changes, lots of pressures on mfgs, consumers' annoyances and so on, if this is so easy to circumvent? Simply by ripping the BD (cinavied or not) and play it on a mediaplayer - which seems to be the trend for the 3rd Millenium (due to BDR prices and scarce availability).

It's like putting 256 locks on the front door while letting the back door wide open. It's a wonderful protection :), much like http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/9/9a/Copy_control_logo.png which worked only on Windows PCs (they are 90% but hey, no serious pirate uses windows).

All commercial media will be cinavied, since this will not pose any problems, to professionals (which do not work with protected signals - they create the signals), and to consumers (the media content they create is free of cinavia, unless they use commercial parts therein). This will only pose problems to copied media. And in order his to work this will be implemented everywhere. Otherwise it won't work.

But people prefer not to see it, until too late.

So the only solution still remains the complete removal of cinavia from the audio. Even if it will adversely affect the quality.

jpsdr

25th February 2011, 09:32

So the only solution still remains the complete removal of cinavia from the audio.
Maybe it will not be possible. Assuming with the hack of PS3, we'll be able to find out how it work, it doesn't mean because something can be detected that it can be removed easely.
Well, wait and see...

xenex

25th February 2011, 10:32

Just looking at a TV program guide this evening, I notice that the cable channel HBO is now airing "The Losers," the first instance of a "Cinavied" film we have seen. Does the BROADCAST version include the Cinavia watermark? I don't know. I could easily record it with my DVD-Recorder, but I have no way to check for Cinavia. I own no PS3 (No Sony crap at all, in fact). But how interesting would it be if television/cable broadcasts now start to include the Cinavia watermark.

There would be all sorts of weird implications. "Babies first steps or first dance in front of TV?" Denied!! and etc.....

EDIT FOR ELABORATION:

Many of these DRM schemes, especially Cinavia presume that any home-made recording just must be an attempt to copy the studio's "crown jewels" and distribute their movie. But it's not always the case, is it. I may be recording my baby's first steps, my dog playing with my cat, or any number of innocent things. If a TV nearby happens to be playing a Cinavia-protected video, and the watermark is there, my own personal video is then corrupted.

Cinavia doesn't care about intent, it just ASSUMES. It assumes if the watermark is heard, you are trying to copy the "crown jewels." Well, I don't care about what is playing on a TV in the background. It's not "jewels" to me, it's background noise. But, ah, it is WATERMARKED background noise.

Ghitulescu

25th February 2011, 10:47

No, the SAT/Cable have other means that prevent in the first place the recording.

xenex

25th February 2011, 12:01

No, the SAT/Cable have other means that prevent in the first place the recording.

Perhaps in Germany they do. In my case here, "The Losers" is in fact playing on the HBO cable network and I can in fact record it on my DVD-recorder. Unless you are personally accusing me of being a liar, this is not in dispute.

My question is if this HBO cable broadcast does or does not contain the Cinavia watermark in the audio. I have no means to check for the watermark myself, but it either is there or is not there. There are two possibilities. It would be interesting to determine which of the two is the case.

But that is just an aside to the larger point I wanted to address. I have to quote myself:

Point #2 - IMPORTANT - ADDRESS THIS PLEASE!

Many of these DRM schemes, especially Cinavia presume that any home-made recording just must be an attempt to copy the studio's "crown jewels" and distribute their movie. But it's not always the case, is it. I may be recording my baby's first steps, my dog playing with my cat, or any number of innocent things. If a TV nearby happens to be playing a Cinavia-protected video, and the watermark is there, my own personal video is then corrupted.

Cinavia doesn't care about intent, it just ASSUMES. It assumes if the watermark is heard, you are trying to copy the "crown jewels." Well, I don't care about what is playing on a TV in the background. It's not "jewels" to me, it's background noise. But, ah, it is WATERMARKED background noise.

SamuriHL has done extensive tests and has determined that Cinavia is an audio-only based watermark. Agree? I think it is beyond dispute. Now, my question is what are the possible "unintended effects" of the watermark being played in the background of otherwise innocent home recordings. SO:

(A) IF I have a Cinavia-watermarked film playing in my home in the background and

(B) IF I record something innocent within audio range of (A)

THEN does my innocently recorded video (B) get corrupted/watermarked by the Cinavia from (A) as well?

I'd say it does. And that's the evil of it.

Ghitulescu

25th February 2011, 12:27

I'm not calling anyone a liar. Any new fact is quite welcome.
What you did however was an analog copy. Cinavia does not prevent the copying, just the playback of a copy. And needs for this either old gear with new FW or new gear.

Luckily for them, old gear won't last forever.

derbeDeus

25th February 2011, 12:48

There would be all sorts of weird implications. "Babies first steps or first dance in front of TV?" Denied!! and etc.....

Hence the 20 minutes grace period. They want to let you record "babies first steps", but not "baby watched The Losers whole movie without having to P once" ;)

Stereodude

25th February 2011, 13:06

Hence the 20 minutes grace period. They want to let you record "babies first steps", but not "baby watched The Losers whole movie without having to P once" ;)Nonsense, they want to let you get interested in the movie then kill the audio on you so that more inclined to pay us so you can watch the rest of it instead of simply deciding to skip it.

Ghitulescu

25th February 2011, 20:13

People that watch Camrips on their PCs are not yet affected. Like usual with the copy protections, the most affected are the honest customers. The bright side of the story is that the originals are cheaper, in comparison with DVDs and VHSs at the same stage of evolution. If they'll drop out the idea of unskippable trailers and stuff, I will not care too much about backing up a BD. A brand BDR costs anyway at least 4€ and a BD-R DL at least 9€, compared to 10-15€ a BD-ROM. I mean brand names, not X-Layer and Co., that last 1 month after burning.

derbeDeus

25th February 2011, 20:35

Nonsense, they want to let you get interested in the movie then kill the audio on you so that more inclined to pay us so you can watch the rest of it instead of simply deciding to skip it.

Nonsense nonsense :P
Why don't they mute the audio for Message 1 then, huh?
They mute the audio to tell you, in a way, that audio is the problem with your recording (see also the Message 3).

ChiDragon

26th February 2011, 05:49

Perhaps they feel that the type of person downloading camcorder'd theatrical films and viewing them on his STB isn't the type of person to go out and spend $10 on a ticket after a mute message comes up.

derbeDeus

26th February 2011, 22:16

The point was: the 20 mins is a "grace period". They also mention that on Cinavia/Verance site (there you'll see 10mins).
Btw: can anyone with Cinavia on LG player tell us what was the grace period there?

setarip_old

28th February 2011, 20:13

I saw the following, supposedly successful, methodology suggested at another forum. Perhaps someone with Verance/"Cinavia" affected hardware can try it:

Used Adobe Audition 1.5 to apply the following to the (ed. down)converted audio:
scientific filter - remove subsonic rumble (preset)
auto click/pop noise reduction
central channel extractor filter - karaoke (drop vocals 20dB) PRESET

HWK

1st March 2011, 00:58

I saw the following, supposedly successful, methodology suggested at another forum. Perhaps someone with Verance/"Cinavia" affected hardware can try it:

Tried it doesn't work on ps3. Still mute the audio :mad: Furthermore it remove quite bit of audio samples which can be heard if not removed. Mainly voice of actors and sometime music as well.

Stereodude

1st March 2011, 02:08

If you have two versions of the same soundtrack one with and one without can't you just subtract one from the other and see how / where they differ? If this thing is as robust as claimed the watermark can't be all that subtle.

setarip_old

1st March 2011, 03:37

@HWK

Hi!

Thank you for trying and reporting your findings ;>}

RedDwarf1

1st March 2011, 17:31

Tried it doesn't work on ps3. Still mute the audio :mad: Furthermore it remove quite bit of audio samples which can be heard if not removed. Mainly voice of actors and sometime music as well.

I saw mentioned on another forum that DVDFab 8.0.7.0 (Beta) is meant to be able to make Blu Ray Disk copies with Cinavia playable on PS3's and has done for about a month. There has since been an updated version 8.0.7.3.

http://www.dvdfab.com/cinavia.htm

http://forum.dvdfab.com/showthread.php?t=7102

setarip_old

1st March 2011, 18:10

@RedDwarf

Hi!

Thank you for the links but, if you read through this thread, you'll see that the DVDFab methodology is already well-known and has been discussed at length here ;>}

RedDwarf1

2nd March 2011, 01:18

I didn't have time to read the whole thread as was getting quite large and I always forget that this forum has a thread search capability.

So it's the streaming that it doesn't fix but direct BluRay disk playback it does as it only makes a change to the BluRay disk to allow playback but does not actually remove Cinavia.

Best of luck finding a solution. Hopefully a fix will be found like it was for Blu Ray.

Ghitulescu

2nd March 2011, 08:44

Nothing will "fix" cinavia, only its completely removal.
Temporary solutions are:
- resist upgrading
- rip the BDs (and some DVDs now) and play them on players that do not have yet cinavia on-board (see also the first point - resist upgrading)
- create fake originals (not all players can be fooled though).

cwl7454

3rd March 2011, 10:57

These posts are questioning AnyDVD vs DVDFab and what they can and can't do in regards to Blurays; can I throw a third into the mix as to their claims as this is the first time I had ever heard of them:

"Modiac blu-ray ripper , is regarded as the best conversion tool in the world, which could decrypt any one of the blu-ray discs you want and convert them into each kinds of media formats you like,"
"Rips every blu-ray discs you like and remove each kind of protections immediately."

Just curious.

mike20021969

3rd March 2011, 11:10

"Rips every blu-ray discs you like and remove each kind of protections immediately."
Except Cinavia.

Ghitulescu

3rd March 2011, 13:18

"Modiac blu-ray ripper , is regarded as the best conversion tool in the world, which could decrypt any one of the blu-ray discs you want and convert them into each kinds of media formats you like,"
"Rips every blu-ray discs you like and remove each kind of protections immediately."

Adult people should be immune to these scams :) :p

Big Vern

3rd March 2011, 16:45

So, if I muxed an AC3 soundtrack from a non Cinavia DVD to the blu-ray version of same film, would it work in Cinavia based players?

Ghitulescu

3rd March 2011, 16:47

Yes, provided no other cinavia tracks exist.

Big Vern

3rd March 2011, 17:30

Yes, provided no other cinavia tracks exist.

No, it will be just the video [movie only] from a blu-ray. muxed with a DVD AC3 soundtrack. Output will be an AVCHD [DVD9].

Thanks.

fengtao

4th March 2011, 10:25

You can mux DVD AC3 with Blu-ray video stream, and still get a Blu-ray structure, but more and more DVD discs contain Cinavia too, so it's not effective.

Big Vern

4th March 2011, 11:41

What is the best tool for doing NTSC to PAL conversion please?

I have Takers, Blu-Ray, imported from Amazon USA. I also have Takers on DVD, UK, region 2. I wanna mux the UK soundtrack with the USA blu-ray video, but first I need to get the blu-ray video to PAL with no 1-second stutter. The reason? Takers on DVD has Cinavia, but only reported in region A, USA. No one knows about the Region 2, UK version.

derbeDeus

4th March 2011, 13:12

Big Vern

4th March 2011, 13:23

It says on the back of the DVD case. Afaik, any Takers DVD, by Sony, has it.
So you're out of luck.

I did read that it was confirmed that Takers region 1, US had Cinavia, not Region 2, UK. Thats why I wanted to mess around today and see if it worked.

derbeDeus

4th March 2011, 15:27

I did read that it was confirmed that Takers region 1, US had Cinavia, not Region 2, UK. Thats why I wanted to mess around today and see if it worked.

Well, since you have Takers DVD uk, you could confirm for us if it has Cinavia logo on the box or not.

setarip_old

4th March 2011, 18:31

Considering what's being dealt with here and the obvious adversarial relationship (Users versus Studios etal), rather than accept a logo on a box as proof positive that watermarking is actually present, can someone please actually swap out the audiostreams from the "Takers" blu-ray (after confirming that those streams DO trigger Verance/"Cinavia") and swap in the audiostreams from the DVD (purportedly also containing the watermarking) - and see if this hybrid version of the Blu-ray still triggers Verance/"Cinavia"?

The excellent revealing post #603, by "xenex", brings to light OTHER aspects related to this protection but, for lack of affected hardware, does not confirm or refute the existence of the watermarking on the DVD version of "The Takers")

derbeDeus

4th March 2011, 19:15

Considering what's being dealt with here and the obvious adversarial relationship (Users versus Studios etal), rather than accept a logo on a box as proof positive that watermarking is actually present, can someone please actually swap out the audiostreams from the "Takers" blu-ray (after confirming that those streams DO trigger Verance/"Cinavia") and swap in the audiostreams from the DVD (purportedly also containing the watermarking) - and see if this hybrid version of the Blu-ray still triggers Verance/"Cinavia"?

The easiest way to test it is to make a dvd copy and test the copy without messing with track swapping. If it triggers on dvd backup, it will trigger if you put the dvd audio into bd backup.

Ghitulescu

4th March 2011, 20:33

Considering what's being dealt with here and the obvious adversarial relationship (Users versus Studios etal), rather than accept a logo on a box as proof positive that watermarking is actually present...

Well the presence of a logo means that the associated item is present. Cinavia is a mandatory part of the AACS, and the licensing protocol requires the presence of logos gfor each implemented function.

Remember the scandal Phlips created some years ago, when unCDs were launched. These are not CD-Audio, they should consequently bear no CD-DA logo. That is the power of a logo (and that of the certification body behind :)).

setarip_old

4th March 2011, 20:37

@derbeDeus

Hi!

Unless I'm mistaken (I searched this entire thread before posting this), playing a backup of the DVD version of "The Takers" does not trigger the Verance/"Cinavia" notification (Purportedly/Presumably contains the watermarking to obviate the possibility of using the DVD track on the Blu-ray version)

setarip_old

4th March 2011, 21:02

@Ghitulescu Well the presence of a logo means that the associated item is present.

1) You are apparently far more trusting of "them" than I am.

2) I've seen and read nothing that specifically precludes the appearance of the Verance/"Cinavia" logo on a DVD jacket or DVD, whether the disc contains all, some, or none of the components of that protection.

3) the licensing protocol requires the presence of logos gfor each implemented function. Perhaps just a lack of information on my part but, I'm not aware of the Verance/"Cinavia" logo appearing on any standalone players and/or PS3s manufactured after the third quarter of 2010.

Rather than speculating about what is or isn't legally required, or what may or may not exist, I'd reiterate my request that someone with Verance/"Cinavia" affected hardware actually test the video-only stream of the Blu-ray of "The Takers" combined with the audio-only stream(s) of the DVD version of "The Takers" - the results of which will be simple, concise and certain...

xenex

5th March 2011, 06:22

@setarip_old

As you noted, I do not personally own any Cinavia-affected gear, but through some internet searching I have found a few threads/posts that do seem to confirm that both the "Takers" and "Burlesque" DVDs do contain the watermark, and do trigger the message on the PS3. See these links:

http://forum.lgsoftwareinnovations.com/showthread.php?t=32602
http://club.myce.com/f116/burlesque-cinavia-protection-320182/
http://forum.dvdfab.com/showthread.php?t=11479
http://forum.slysoft.com/showthread.php?p=298906

olyteddy

5th March 2011, 08:17

Am I wrong in thinking that Cinavia encodes a message about media type? That is, if you try to play the soundtrack from a theatrical movie on a 'protected' (infected?) device it simply checks that the media type is not a movie projector and squelches it. Likewise if you play a DVD soundtrack that isn't on a pressed DVD it kills it too. If that's the case, then it can easily be applied to any media including Audio CDs (is it pressed, or is it Memorex?).
Here's a reference to this from Verance: http://www.verance.com/technology/index.php.

As to the actual encoding, this wiki article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communication_with_submarines brings up an interesting concept as to how the encoding might be done, using low data rates and the audio signal as a carrier.

Ghitulescu

5th March 2011, 08:31

Verance checks for the watermark. If it's present then the player triggers the message/s according to the disk: original or not. All non-disk media (especially HDDs and other storage types) are by default copies. A BD-ROM with video should have the BD-Mark (mandatory). A DVD-ROM has CSS. Recordable media do not have these copyright marks. There's no need to do additional checks (ATIP and similar old techniques).
Watermarking CD-DAs is counterproductive, first because it degrades the sound quality (killer application), secondly because there are billions of non-cinavia-enabled portable mediaplayers and standalones worldwide, so the impact will be next to none.
For your question with the projector, how many consumers do own or have access to theatrical projection gear? So inherently the format that contains the pirated movie will be a copy.

I said it several times now, read the patents! Reading them prevents the spread of misconceptions and "educated guesses"

xenex

5th March 2011, 09:17

What is really needed at this point is another thread, separate from this one, entitled "Cinavia - What We Know" or such. I myself have read the patents (most of them, not all) and I have read ALL of the AACS watermark specifications that are available. I actually 'enjoy' reading the specs and educating myself on this new tech. So I know a bit about this stuff, and I really don't speculate.

However, I do not own any Cinavia-enabled devices and do not intend to purchase such. And I'll never purchase anything made by Sony (EVER). So my ability to actually test things is limited.

I'd like to start that new thread, and would be willing to, but it's quite a bit of work to write it all up, provide references, and etc. If I find time, I may try to do so. It is frustrating to no end how much misinformation is out there.

setarip_old

5th March 2011, 10:20

@xenex

Thank you for helping maintain focus for this thread. Also thanks for finding and providing those links - they appear to provide proof positive that Verance/"Cinavia" protection can indeed "do its thing" to DVDs as well (at least, regarding the present version of the PS3).

What is really needed at this point is another thread, separate from this one, entitled "Cinavia - What We Know" or such.Personally, I think you have a wonderful idea ;>}

A couple of suggestions, if I may, before you get it rolling:

1) With the cooperation of "Doom9", get yourself appointed as a "special" moderator, specifically for the new thread you've proposed. This would allow you to make certain that proper focus is maintained for the thread - including the deletion of inapplicable posts.

2) Arrange for any and all detailed true development work and communication regarding same to be done somewhere other than at the Doom9 Forum (With, perhaps, periodic generalized updates/progress reports posted to this thread)

cwl7454

5th March 2011, 10:27

@xenex

However, I do not own any Cinavia-enabled devices and do not intend to purchase such. And I'll never purchase anything made by Sony (EVER).

I too am like you, ever since sony's attempted deception I have never purchased another sony product, nor do I intend to. Am in no hurry to jump into the BR foray untill things are sorted out. Will simply rent from redbox and return if I ever desire to see something in bluray. Right now am content with dvd, alot less hassle.
My personal feeling is that they want me to buy, for a expensive price, a BRay that I am going to watch once or twice, no thanks.

mayhem2408

8th March 2011, 02:34

Does anyone have the Audio files ripped from the DVD and the Bluray from "The Takers". I'd like to get my hands on them and pump them through some equipment to see if I can spot the differences.
Once we know what to look for we can work on removing it.

setarip_old

8th March 2011, 04:31

@mayhem2408

Hi!

We don't share copyrighted materials at the Doom9 Forums...

Please note that in light of the fact that "The Takers" is the first (known) release to have Verance/"Cinavia" protection on BOTH the Blu-ray and DVD releases, it would seem highly unlikely that any meaningful information could be gained by comparing their audiostreams...

mayhem2408

8th March 2011, 07:04

Can someone give me the name of a Movie where the Bluray release has Cinavia and the DVD does not. I'll go and by them and see what I come up with.

setarip_old

8th March 2011, 08:18

@mayhem2048

Click on the following link:

http://forum.dvdfab.com/showthread.php?p=46933

mayhem2408

9th March 2011, 19:51

@mayhem2048

Click on the following link:

http://forum.dvdfab.com/showthread.php?p=46933

Thanks. I already have Salt on Bluray, so I will get it on DVD as well and do some comparisons on the audio tracks and see if I can find anything. Has anyone else tried this before?

jpsdr

10th March 2011, 09:23

Is there any way before trying to do anything to confirm for sure that Salt DVD don't have also Cinavia ?

xenex

10th March 2011, 10:15

Besides there being absolutely ZERO reports of the presence of Cinavia on the "Salt" DVD anywhere on the entirety of the internet, as well as the lack of the "Cinavia Protected" logo on the back of the DVD cover, one might also note that the DVD itself does not contain an AACS folder, which is a prerequisite of Cinavia protected DVDs. Please see here:

http://www.aacsla.com/specifications/AACS_Spec_Signed_CSS_Final_0.951.pdf

ADDENDUM:

To be clear, in the following, I speak only of Cinavia-affected DVD media. Not Blu-Ray.

Ok, (1) IF a DVD's audio is suspected to contain the Cinavia watermark, that DVD MUST contain an AACS folder. The contents of that folder, a hash table and a content certificate are the ONLY WAY for a Cinavia-detection-enabled player to verify the "TRUSTED_SOURCE" status. Ergo, if a DVD suspected of containing a Cinavia watermark does not contain an AACS folder, it does not contain the Cinavia watermark.

Now, (2) CAN a DVD contain an AACS folder without having the Cinavia watermark? Well, yes, of course it can. HOWEVER a Cinavia-detection-enabled player will only look for the AACS folder upon detection of the Cinavia watermark. (Might as well delete it then, no watermark, no check!)

So, (3) basically, presence of an AACS folder on a DVD indicates the presence of the Cinavia watermark in the audio. The absence of the AACS folder on a DVD indicates the absence of the Cinavia watermark in the audio.

forumjunkie

10th March 2011, 11:29

Does anyDVD HD take away Cinavia?

Ghitulescu

10th March 2011, 11:53

No. The logical conclusion anyone reading this topic could reach.

xenex

10th March 2011, 12:52

It's just impossible. There is no need to even try to help these folks. I give up.

Cinavia is in your Television. Cinavia is in your Receiver. Cinavia is in your HDMI cable. Cinavia is in your head.

Big Vern

10th March 2011, 13:09

Thanks. I already have Salt on Bluray, so I will get it on DVD as well and do some comparisons on the audio tracks and see if I can find anything. Has anyone else tried this before?

Yes. Save your time and cash, there is no Cinavia on the DVD version of Salt, 100% certain of that.

jpsdr

10th March 2011, 16:14

No, it's the oposite. He searches to compare audio with cinavia with audio without, so, it's perfect.

Ghitulescu

10th March 2011, 16:54

And if one imagines that having the same audio in two tracks, w/ and w/o cinavia, can manage to cut cinavia out (like classical denoisers), s/he's naïve.

jpsdr

10th March 2011, 17:18

I think he first wants to analyse the tracks, to see if he can find something.

Ghitulescu

10th March 2011, 17:27

The algorithms are clearly described in the patents. One cannot blindly find out something so resilient to manipulations.

SamuriHL

10th March 2011, 17:39

Imagine if you have two stacks of hay. They're identical, except for a needle in one of them. So you compare them straw by straw looking for the needle. You have no idea what the needle looks like or where it is. That is the essense of what "comparing the tracks looking for 'cinavia'" is going to be like. You're looking for.....something. Some kind of "difference". With the belief and theory that you can isolate it somehow. Then, as the theory goes, you can "filter out" the Cinavia signal. :rolleyes: Not likely.

HOWEVER.....

The tracks AREN'T identical, are they? You're talking about an HD audio track on the blu-ray with Cinavia vs an AC3 or DTS lossy track on the DVD without. You think maybe you'll find "differences" in that comparison that aren't related to Cinavia? I'm gonna say yea, that's very likely.

In the end, blind comparisons aren't going to solve this problem. It'll take real reverse engineering and a LOT of effort.

Ghitulescu

10th March 2011, 17:57

Simplistic seen, yes. The problem is not to find the differences between track A and track B, but to reverse the algorithm for every affected BD. There are about 7 methods described, and of course their combinations.

A player must not decompile cinavia, and not remove it. Just identify it.

SamuriHL

10th March 2011, 18:16

Yup, that's correct. The key is definitely going to be to look at the detection side of that equation and figure out what it's looking for. Once you can do that, you can THEN identify the embedded Cinavia signal. But poking around in a track looking for something blindly....unless you have 1000 monkeys, it's unlikely. :D

setarip_old

10th March 2011, 18:29

As I've suggested previously, one can hopefully look forward to the recent hack of the PS3 yielding a permanent solution to the Verance/"Cinavia" protection...

SamuriHL

10th March 2011, 18:33

The problem with that is that I haven't seen any evidence that links the PS3 jailbreaking to anything Cinavia related. Have we heard of anyone anywhere looking at the PS3's BD player software component to try to figure out Cinavia? I haven't seen evidence of that. That's NOT to say no one's doing it, and perhaps keeping it secret, but, I've not heard of anyone doing it.

setarip_old

10th March 2011, 18:54

Have we heard of anyone anywhere looking at the PS3's BD player software component to try to figure out Cinavia?

I view this lack of public "detailed progress reports" to be a good thing. As I said in Post #664 of this thread:Not everyone operates in the glare of daylight ;>}

I also suggested to "xenex" that if he/she started a more technical thread than this one, arrangements should be made for any and all detailed true development work and communication regarding same to be done somewhere other than at the Doom9 Forum (With, perhaps, periodic generalized updates/progress reports posted to this thread)...

victorth

12th March 2011, 02:06

Perhaps this is a crazy idea, and if it is I won't be upset if you tell me so. But I was reading xenex's post #846 regarding AACS folders on DVDs that have Cinavia. Is it possible to create a counterfeit AACS folder? If so, and you've ripped a Cinavia-infected BluRay and down-converted to DVD format, could you put said counterfeit AACS folder on the DVD to trick out the player? It wouldn't actually remove Cinavia, but it would be one more way of getting around it.

SamuriHL

12th March 2011, 02:53

Can't create the AACS certificate. You'd need the private key used to create them and that's not available.

xenex

12th March 2011, 11:20

The program I have written here may be of interest to Linux programmers. Without the AACS_CCpriv key it is kind of useless, but it can verify the AACS certificate, hash table, and can build a new hash table. I wrote this program for my own edification. I'm still working on this, but maybe some people will find it interesting:

/* Experimental program to display/verify/examine AACS/ECDSA data on Cinavia-affected DVD's
* (c) 2011 xenex, Licensed under GNU GPL v2, see <http://www.gnu.org/licenses/> for details.
*
* You will need libssl-dev and libiso9660-dev installed
*
* compile with: g++ -o aacschk aacschk.c -lssl -liso9660 -Wall
*/

#define _FILE_OFFSET_BITS 64
#define _LARGEFILE64_SOURCE 1
#define _LARGEFILE_SOURCE 1
#define DVD_BLOCK_SIZE 2048
#define BUFMAX 5000
#define IFOMAX 300

// KNOWN key AACS_CCpub
#define AACS_CC_PUB_X "686795158131444840350934441718292981749606298444"
#define AACS_CC_PUB_Y "667926496774724305600543583224894590551199207"

// UNKNOWN key AACS_CCpriv
#define AACS_CC_PRV_X "000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000"
#define AACS_CC_PRV_Y "000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000"

#include <stdio.h>
#include <unistd.h>
#include <fcntl.h>
#include <cdio/iso9660.h>
#include <algorithm>
#include <string.h>
#include <cstring>
#include <openssl/sha.h>
#include <openssl/bn.h>
#include <openssl/evp.h>
#include <openssl/obj_mac.h>
#include <openssl/err.h>
#include <openssl/ec.h>
#include <openssl/ecdsa.h>

using namespace std;

void hprintf(unsigned char*, int);
unsigned long long read_aacs(int, iso9660_t *);
unsigned long long read_ifo(int, iso9660_t *);
unsigned long long read_video(int, iso9660_t *, unsigned long long);
EC_KEY *aacs_key();
EC_GROUP *aacs_group();

int main(int argc, char *argv[])
{
unsigned int i, j, k, l, fd, vobnum, dgst_len = 0;
unsigned int NHVcnt = 1;
off64_t disc_len;
unsigned long long pos, savpos, nhv, index, offset, vend = 0;
unsigned long long htvalues[500000];
unsigned char digest[EVP_MAX_MD_SIZE];
unsigned char * buffer;
unsigned char * hbuffer;
iso9660_t * p_iso;

//ECDSA Values

EC_KEY *eckey = NULL;
ECDSA_SIG *sig = ECDSA_SIG_new();
BIGNUM *pub_key_x = BN_new(); BN_dec2bn(&pub_key_x,AACS_CC_PUB_X); // AACS_CC_pubX
BIGNUM *pub_key_y = BN_new(); BN_dec2bn(&pub_key_y,AACS_CC_PUB_Y); // AACS_CC_pubY
const EC_GROUP *group;
EC_POINT *pub_key;
EVP_MD_CTX md_ctx;

//END ECDSA Values

if (!(buffer = (unsigned char *) malloc(BUFMAX*DVD_BLOCK_SIZE))) { printf("Main Buffer Allocation : FAIL!\n"); return 1; }
if (!(hbuffer = (unsigned char *) malloc(BUFMAX*DVD_BLOCK_SIZE))) { printf("Hash Buffer Allocation : FAIL!\n"); return 1; }
if (argc < 2) { printf("usage:\n\t %s <input iso> || <input device>\n", argv[0]); return 1; }
if ((fd = open(argv[1], O_RDONLY)) < 0) { printf("Open Input File : FAIL!\n"); return 1; }
if ((disc_len = lseek(fd, 0, SEEK_END)) < 0) { printf("Determine Input Size: FAIL!\n"); return 1; }

//Get the total block/sector size of the entire DVD/ISO
//printf("\nDVDBLOCKNUMBER: %d\n", (int)(disc_len / DVD_BLOCK_SIZE));

if ((p_iso = iso9660_open(argv[1])) == NULL) { printf("Open %s as ISO9660 : FAIL!\n", argv[1]); return 1; }

//Get the start LSN's for all IFO files
//for(i=0; i<100; i++) if(read_ifo(i,p_iso)) ; else { printf("END OF READ_IFO TEST\n\n"); break; }

/////////////////// WE FIRST READ IN AND SHA1-HASH THE HASH TABLE FILE /////////////////////////////

pos = read_aacs(2,p_iso);
if(pos != 0) {
lseek(fd, pos * DVD_BLOCK_SIZE, SEEK_SET);
read(fd, hbuffer, DVD_BLOCK_SIZE);
nhv = hbuffer[1]*65536 + hbuffer[2]*256 + hbuffer[3];
lseek(fd, pos * DVD_BLOCK_SIZE, SEEK_SET);
read(fd, hbuffer,((nhv+1)*8));
SHA1(hbuffer,(nhv+1)*8,digest);
printf("HASH TABLE SHA-1 DIGEST: "); hprintf(&digest[12],8);
}

////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

/////////// THIS WILL READ, DISPLAY, AND ECDSA SIGNATURE-VERIFY THE CERTIFICATE FILE ///////////////

pos = read_aacs(1,p_iso);
if(pos != 0) {
lseek(fd, pos * DVD_BLOCK_SIZE, SEEK_SET);
read(fd, buffer, DVD_BLOCK_SIZE);

printf("\n");
printf("Certificate Type : "); hprintf(&buffer[0],1); printf("Reserved : "); hprintf(&buffer[1],1);
printf("Total # of Hash Units : "); hprintf(&buffer[2],4); printf("Total # of Layers : "); hprintf(&buffer[6],1);
printf("Layer_Number : "); hprintf(&buffer[7],1); printf("Number of Hash Units : "); hprintf(&buffer[8],4);
printf("Number of Digests : "); hprintf(&buffer[12],2); printf("Applicant ID : "); hprintf(&buffer[14],2);
printf("Content Sequence # : "); hprintf(&buffer[16],4); printf("Reserved : "); hprintf(&buffer[20],2);
printf("Reserved : "); hprintf(&buffer[22],2); printf("Len. Format Spec. Sec.: "); hprintf(&buffer[24],2);
printf("Reserved : "); hprintf(&buffer[26],2); printf("Content HTDigest : "); hprintf(&buffer[28],8);
printf("Signature Data 'R' : "); hprintf(&buffer[36],20); printf("Signature Data 'S' : "); hprintf(&buffer[56],20);

BN_bin2bn(buffer+36, 20, sig->r);
BN_bin2bn(buffer+56, 20, sig->s);
eckey = aacs_key();
group = EC_KEY_get0_group(eckey);
group = aacs_group();
pub_key = EC_POINT_new(group);
EC_POINT_set_affine_coordinates_GFp(group, pub_key, pub_key_x, pub_key_y, NULL);
EC_KEY_set_public_key(eckey, pub_key);
EVP_MD_CTX_init(&md_ctx);
EVP_DigestInit(&md_ctx, EVP_ecdsa());
EVP_DigestUpdate(&md_ctx, buffer, 36);
EVP_DigestFinal(&md_ctx, digest, &dgst_len);
printf(" -> %i <-\n",ECDSA_do_verify(digest, dgst_len, sig, eckey));
}

////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

/////////////////////////////// THIS DISPLAY THE HASH TABLE FILE ///////////////////////////////////

printf("\n");
printf("NHV : "); hprintf(&hbuffer[0],4);
printf("Reserved : "); hprintf(&hbuffer[4],4);

nhv = hbuffer[1]*65536 + hbuffer[2]*256 + hbuffer[3];

//nhv = 32; //This can make the HV printout shorter. Comment it out for the full list
for(i=8; i<((nhv+1)*8); i+=8) { printf("HV : 0%05x : ",NHVcnt++); hprintf(&hbuffer[i],8); }

////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

exit(1); // Code beyond this can re-create a hash table. Tested, and works perfectly.

NHVcnt = 1; //the hash value count starts at 1 (one)

//// Start with VIDEO_TS.IFO and VIDEO_TS.VOB (if there is one) first as per specification

pos = read_ifo(0,p_iso);
lseek(fd, pos * DVD_BLOCK_SIZE, SEEK_SET);
read(fd, buffer, IFOMAX * DVD_BLOCK_SIZE);
l = 0;
i = (buffer[0xdc] << 24) | (buffer[0xdd] << 16) | (buffer[0xde] << 8) | (buffer[0xdf]) * DVD_BLOCK_SIZE;
if(i != 0) {
j = ((buffer[i] << 24) | (buffer[i+1] << 16) | (buffer[i+2] << 8) | (buffer[i+3])) + i;
for(i+=4; i<=j; i+=4) { k = ((buffer[i] << 24) | (buffer[i+1] << 16) | (buffer[i+2] << 8) | (buffer[i+3])); htvalues[l++] = k; }
pos = read_video(0,p_iso,vend); htvalues[l] = vend;
for(k=0; k<l; k++) { index = htvalues[k]; offset = htvalues[k+1]; nhv = (offset - index) * DVD_BLOCK_SIZE;
lseek(fd, (pos + index) * DVD_BLOCK_SIZE, SEEK_SET);
read(fd, buffer, nhv); SHA1(buffer, nhv, digest);
printf("HV : 0%05x : ", NHVcnt++); hprintf(&digest[12],8); }
}

///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

for(vobnum = 1; vobnum<100; vobnum++) {

pos = read_ifo(vobnum,p_iso);
lseek(fd, pos * DVD_BLOCK_SIZE, SEEK_SET);
read(fd, buffer, IFOMAX * DVD_BLOCK_SIZE);
l = 0;
i = (buffer[0xdc] << 24) | (buffer[0xdd] << 16) | (buffer[0xde] << 8) | (buffer[0xdf]) * DVD_BLOCK_SIZE;
if(i != 0) {
j = ((buffer[i] << 24) | (buffer[i+1] << 16) | (buffer[i+2] << 8) | (buffer[i+3])) + i;
for(i+=4; i<=j; i+=4) { k = ((buffer[i] << 24) | (buffer[i+1] << 16) | (buffer[i+2] << 8) | (buffer[i+3])); htvalues[l++] = k; }
pos = read_video(vobnum * 10,p_iso,vend); htvalues[l] = vend;
for(k=0; k<l; k++) { index = htvalues[k]; offset = htvalues[k+1]; nhv = (offset - index) * DVD_BLOCK_SIZE;
lseek(fd, (pos + index) * DVD_BLOCK_SIZE, SEEK_SET);
read(fd, buffer, nhv); SHA1(buffer, nhv, digest);
printf("HV : 0%05x : ", NHVcnt++); hprintf(&digest[12],8); }
}

///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

pos = read_ifo(vobnum,p_iso);
lseek(fd, pos * DVD_BLOCK_SIZE, SEEK_SET);
read(fd, buffer, IFOMAX * DVD_BLOCK_SIZE);
l = 0;
i = (buffer[0xe4] << 24) | (buffer[0xe5] << 16) | (buffer[0xe6] << 8) | (buffer[0xe7]) * DVD_BLOCK_SIZE;
j = ((buffer[i] << 24) | (buffer[i+1] << 16) | (buffer[i+2] << 8) | (buffer[i+3])) + i;
for(i+=4; i<=j; i+=4) { k = ((buffer[i] << 24) | (buffer[i+1] << 16) | (buffer[i+2] << 8) | (buffer[i+3])); htvalues[l++] = k; }
pos = read_video((vobnum*10+1),p_iso,vend);

for(unsigned int x=(vobnum*10+9); x>=(vobnum*10+1); x--) { if((read_video(x,p_iso,vend))) {
savpos = (vend + read_video(x,p_iso,vend)); break; }}
vend = savpos - pos;
htvalues[l] = vend;

for(k=0; k<l; k++) { index = htvalues[k]; offset = htvalues[k+1]; nhv = (offset - index) * DVD_BLOCK_SIZE;
lseek(fd, (pos + index) * DVD_BLOCK_SIZE, SEEK_SET);
read(fd, buffer, nhv); SHA1(buffer, nhv, digest);
printf("HV : 0%05x : ", NHVcnt++); hprintf(&digest[12],8); }
}

return 0;
}

void hprintf(unsigned char* data, int length) { int ptr = 0; for(;ptr < length;ptr++) printf("%02x",(unsigned char)*(data+ptr)); printf("\n"); }

unsigned long long read_aacs(int ft, iso9660_t *p_iso)
{
CdioList_t *p_entlist;
CdioListNode_t *p_entnode;
unsigned long long aacslsn = 0;

p_entlist = iso9660_ifs_readdir (p_iso, "/AACS/");
if( !p_entlist) p_entlist = iso9660_ifs_readdir (p_iso, "/aacs/");

if( !p_entlist) { printf("No AACS Folder Found!\n"); return 0; }

if (p_entlist) {
_CDIO_LIST_FOREACH (p_entnode, p_entlist)
{
char filename[512];
iso9660_stat_t *p_statbuf = (iso9660_stat_t *) _cdio_list_node_data (p_entnode);
iso9660_name_translate(p_statbuf->filename, filename);
if(! strcmp(filename,"css_content_cert.aacs") && ft==1) aacslsn=p_statbuf->lsn;
if(! strcmp(filename,"css_content_hash_table.aacs") && ft==2) aacslsn=p_statbuf->lsn;
}
_cdio_list_free (p_entlist, true);
}
return aacslsn;
}

unsigned long long read_ifo(int ft, iso9660_t *p_iso)
{
CdioList_t *p_entlist;
CdioListNode_t *p_entnode;
unsigned long long ifolsn=NULL;
char filename[512], wfilename[512] = "video_ts.ifo";
if(ft > 0) sprintf(wfilename, "%s%02i%s", "vts_", ft, "_0.ifo");

p_entlist = iso9660_ifs_readdir (p_iso, "/VIDEO_TS/");
if( !p_entlist) p_entlist = iso9660_ifs_readdir (p_iso, "/video_ts/");

if( !p_entlist) { printf("No VIDEO_TS Folder Found!\n"); return 0; }

if (p_entlist) {
_CDIO_LIST_FOREACH (p_entnode, p_entlist)
{
iso9660_stat_t *p_statbuf = (iso9660_stat_t *) _cdio_list_node_data (p_entnode);
iso9660_name_translate(p_statbuf->filename, filename);
if(! strcmp(filename,wfilename) && ft== 0) { ifolsn=p_statbuf->lsn; }
if(! strcmp(filename,wfilename) && ft > 0) { ifolsn=p_statbuf->lsn; }
}
_cdio_list_free (p_entlist, true);
}

if(ifolsn) { return ifolsn; }
return 0;

}

unsigned long long read_video(int ft, iso9660_t *p_iso, unsigned long long vts_end)
{
CdioList_t *p_entlist;
CdioListNode_t *p_entnode;
unsigned long long vidlsn = 0;

p_entlist = iso9660_ifs_readdir (p_iso, "/VIDEO_TS/");
if( !p_entlist) p_entlist = iso9660_ifs_readdir (p_iso, "/video_ts/");

if( !p_entlist) { printf("No VIDEO_TS Folder Found!\n"); return(0); }

if (p_entlist) {
_CDIO_LIST_FOREACH (p_entnode, p_entlist)
{
char filename[512], wfilename[512] = "video_ts.vob";
if(ft > 0) sprintf(wfilename, "%s%02i%s%1i%s", "vts_", ft / 10, "_", ft % 10, ".vob");
iso9660_stat_t *p_statbuf = (iso9660_stat_t *) _cdio_list_node_data (p_entnode);
iso9660_name_translate(p_statbuf->filename, filename);
if(! strcmp(filename,wfilename) && ft==0) { vidlsn=p_statbuf->lsn;
vts_end = (unsigned long long)(p_statbuf->size / 2048); return vidlsn; }
if(! strcmp(filename,wfilename) && ((ft %10) == 0) ) { vidlsn=p_statbuf->lsn;
vts_end = (unsigned long long)(p_statbuf->size / 2048); return vidlsn; }
if(! strcmp(filename,wfilename) && ((ft %10) != 0) ) { vidlsn=p_statbuf->lsn;
vts_end = (unsigned long long)(p_statbuf->size / 2048); return vidlsn; }
}
_cdio_list_free (p_entlist, true);
}

return 0;
}

EC_KEY *aacs_key() {
EC_GROUP *group;
EC_KEY *key = EC_KEY_new();
if (key == NULL) { return NULL; }
group = aacs_group();
if (!EC_KEY_set_group(key, group)) { EC_KEY_free(key); EC_GROUP_free(group); return NULL; }
else { return key; }
}

EC_GROUP *aacs_group() {
EC_GROUP *group = NULL;
EC_POINT *P = NULL;
BN_CTX *ctx = NULL;
BIGNUM *p = NULL, *a = NULL, *b = NULL, *x = NULL, *y = NULL, *order = NULL;
int ok = 0;
//AACS ECDSA Curve Parameters
const char data_p[] = "900812823637587646514106462588455890498729007071";
const char data_a[] = "-3";
const char data_b[] = "366394034647231750324370400222002566844354703832";
const char data_x[] = "264865613959729647018113670854605162895977008838";
const char data_y[] = "51841075954883162510413392745168936296187808697";
const char data_r[] = "900812823637587646514106555566573588779770753047";

if ((ctx = BN_CTX_new()) == NULL) { ECerr(EC_F_EC_GROUP_NEW_FROM_DATA, ERR_R_MALLOC_FAILURE); goto err; }
if ((p = BN_new()) == NULL || (a = BN_new()) == NULL || (b = BN_new()) == NULL || (x = BN_new()) == NULL ||
(y = BN_new()) == NULL || (order = BN_new()) == NULL)
{ ECerr(EC_F_EC_GROUP_NEW_FROM_DATA, ERR_R_MALLOC_FAILURE); goto err; }

if (!BN_dec2bn(&p, data_p) || !BN_dec2bn(&a, data_a) || !BN_dec2bn(&b, data_b)) { ECerr(EC_F_EC_GROUP_NEW_FROM_DATA, ERR_R_BN_LIB); goto err; }
if ((group = EC_GROUP_new_curve_GFp(p, a, b, ctx)) == NULL) { ECerr(EC_F_EC_GROUP_NEW_FROM_DATA, ERR_R_EC_LIB); goto err; }
if ((P = EC_POINT_new(group)) == NULL) { ECerr(EC_F_EC_GROUP_NEW_FROM_DATA, ERR_R_EC_LIB); goto err; }
if (!BN_dec2bn(&x, data_x) || !BN_dec2bn(&y, data_y)) { ECerr(EC_F_EC_GROUP_NEW_FROM_DATA, ERR_R_BN_LIB); goto err; }
if (!EC_POINT_set_affine_coordinates_GF2m(group, P, x, y, ctx)) { ECerr(EC_F_EC_GROUP_NEW_FROM_DATA, ERR_R_EC_LIB); goto err; }
if (!BN_dec2bn(&order, data_r) || !BN_set_word(x, 1)) { ECerr(EC_F_EC_GROUP_NEW_FROM_DATA, ERR_R_BN_LIB); goto err; }
if (!EC_GROUP_set_generator(group, P, order, x)) { ECerr(EC_F_EC_GROUP_NEW_FROM_DATA, ERR_R_EC_LIB); goto err; }
ok=1;
err:
if (!ok) { printf("There was an error in aacs_group function!\n"); EC_GROUP_free(group); group = NULL; }
if (P) EC_POINT_free(P);
if (ctx) BN_CTX_free(ctx);
if (p) BN_free(p);
if (a) BN_free(a);
if (b) BN_free(b);
if (order) BN_free(order);
if (x) BN_free(x);
if (y) BN_free(y);
return group;
}

Eza17

17th March 2011, 13:34

The tracks AREN'T identical, are they? You're talking about an HD audio track on the blu-ray with Cinavia vs an AC3 or DTS lossy track on the DVD without. You think maybe you'll find "differences" in that comparison that aren't related to Cinavia? I'm gonna say yea, that's very likely.

In the end, blind comparisons aren't going to solve this problem. It'll take real reverse engineering and a LOT of effort.

Couldn't you make two identical tracks though?
Find a short 5 second section of sound, preferably a constant sound and cut this from each audio sample.
I'm no sound expert but if you have a short sample like this, surely you could make them identical, even if if involves re-recording with an analogue method (cinavia is supposedly resistant to this so should remain).
Once you have these two short sections, you might then be able to compare for differences.

SamuriHL

17th March 2011, 13:48

No, you can't make them identical. Re-encoding them will only make the situation worse. The idea behind a lossy codec is that you lose information. There is no way to guarantee you "lose" the same bits when re-encoding. (To the audio experts out there I apologize for this vastly crude explanation. I realize it's far more complex than this.) If you're trying to find the proverbial needle in a haystack, you can't have any encoding differences in your source tracks. Even decoding both to lpcm won't help because they aren't the same to begin with. So no, this idea has no chance of ever working even though clever people keep bringing it up every few weeks as though it's a completely new and fresh idea. It will take a real effort to find and remove cinavia.

haggi

17th March 2011, 13:50

Couldn't you make two identical tracks though?
Find a short 5 second section of sound, preferably a constant sound and cut this from each audio sample.
I'm no sound expert but if you have a short sample like this, surely you could make them identical, even if if involves re-recording with an analogue method (cinavia is supposedly resistant to this so should remain).
Once you have these two short sections, you might then be able to compare for differences.

1. Take one audio file from any original audio cd you own. Encode a snipped of about 10 Seconds as
1.a) wave file
1.b) max quality aac
1.c) high quality aac
2. decode the two aac's to wave files
3. compare the three files
4. understand that this is NOT AS EASY AS IT SEEMS

SamuriHL

17th March 2011, 13:52

1. Take one audio file from any original audio cd you own. Encode a snipped of about 10 Seconds as
1.a) wave file
1.b) max quality aac
1.c) high quality aac
2. decode the two aac's to wave files
3. compare the three files
4. understand that this is NOT AS EASY AS IT SEEMS

That will indeed prove the point quite nicely...and that's starting with identical sources!

Eza17

17th March 2011, 15:46

Thanks for the explanation guys, told you I was no expert :)

I was just thinking you could record the sound with a microphone but if I understand you right then even the same sound recorded twice wont be the same.

SamuriHL

17th March 2011, 15:57

That's correct. Just the nature of how audio is done. They will "sound" identical for all intents and purposes, but, as far as bit exact, that's extremely unlikely. When you use a lossy codec like AC3, it drops information that isn't deemed important to the overall sound quality. How it does that depends on a lot of variables. Even assuming the same source, encoding it twice might not necessarily give you bit exact output. There's a whole host of things like sample rate and timing factors that determine the final output. Even theoretically it'd be difficult to get an exact bit for bit copy of a track where one has Cinavia embedded and the other doesn't. And if you're looking for an unknown "signal" embedded in the audio, you'll never know if it's "Cinavia" or some other encoding factor that is causing a "difference". It's really not the way to go about this problem at all. I get that people believe the idea is "simple" in that you take two seemingly identical tracks, subtract them, and whatever is left is "Cinavia". But it's even more complicated than that as Cinavia is mixed into the recording in a very nasty way.

Eza17

18th March 2011, 11:27

Ghitulescu

18th March 2011, 11:35

Thanks for the explanations on why comparing wouldn't work, it's clear to me now why people say this is impossible without the original source without cinavia. Just thinking outside the box and again, sorry if it's a silly question but couldn't you add your own watermark? I know it's probably not straight forward to add a watermark but if some filter could be added which works on a similar principle, i.e. affecting non-audible areas, wouldn't this corrupt the cinavia watermark and prevent it being identified properly? This method obviously wouldn't remove cinavia, rather make it unrecognisable.

I'm getting slowly tired to draw the attention of the "hackers" to the algorithms that are public, thereupon cinavia works. No need to compare or other silly methods, just to reverse one algorithm or their combinations. Then a list will be published with each and one movie, and that's it; the next format will be even more "uncopiable" (and probably the same degree of unsellable).

mayhem2408

18th March 2011, 13:49

Yes. Save your time and cash, there is no Cinavia on the DVD version of Salt, 100% certain of that.

Thats my point. I want to compare the Cinavia Bluray Audio with the Non Cinavia DVD Audio and see if I can find the not audible watermark.

I have the DVD now and have the audio streams from both extracted. Now I'm trying to come up with some algorithms to detect the non audible differences.

And this all has to be done in the analog realm. The Cinavia watermark is ment to survival all types of reencoding which means things like phase shifts will not affect it. It also means that comparing the signals digitally will be nearly impossible. The encoding process on the DVD would produce and completely different digital signature to the Bluray even though they would sound nearly identical. There could be slight phase differences, Left and Right seperation might be slightly different, but these differences would not be heard.

Eza17

18th March 2011, 14:05

I'm getting slowly tired to draw the attention of the "hackers" to the algorithms that are public, thereupon cinavia works. No need to compare or other silly methods, just to reverse one algorithm or their combinations. Then a list will be published with each and one movie, and that's it; the next format will be even more "uncopiable" (and probably the same degree of unsellable).

Sorry I'm not sure what you are saying or implying? I think you are stating that this is not possible by reference to the patents (I have tried reading them but unless you are familiar with the area then they're not that easy to understand). I take it you mean that the watermark cannot be overwritten or confused by other non-audible watermarking.

I'm also sorry you are getting tired of people posting questions, sorry I can't understand the patents and I did use the search before posting to try and determine if someone had asked the question before.

Ghitulescu

18th March 2011, 14:41

Once more,

cinavia is added to an existing audio track using one of the several algorithms and/or their combinations. It's not so simple as adding say a 16kHz narrow pilot signal some people suggested (which is indeed one method), which can be "denoised" out very efficiently (like the FM or hum filters). It involves a spatial distribution, phase changing and so on. It doesn't help to extract the differences from eg The loosers then to apply them to the next BD. Because cinavia is not there to be reverse engineered by the player, only to be recognised. It's much easier to recognize the hum than to get rid of hum, and this is an easy task. That cinavia survives analog loophole, MP3 compression (or any other lossy ones) is because it doesn't depend on artificial signals injected into the audio , but on processing that audio.

These are not always evidenced by running comparisons on both tracks. Since even the MP3 vs WAV is difficult to compare in terms of spatial/phase differences, not to mention what happens if one track is differently mastered than the other, which is extremely likely, as mastering DD is different from mastering LPCM.

MickJT

18th March 2011, 17:26

Well.. I'm going to propose a slight variation of what I said in the SlySoft forums. Firstly, and sorry for possibly saying something that has already been said, has anyone tried playing back two or three Cinavia encoded audio tracks mixed together into 1 file, muxed with the video, and seeing if it gets detected? (Of course you'll have the audio from 3 discs all going at the same time, so it'll sound abhorrent, but nevertheless). If it doesn't get detected, then perhaps a Cinavia signal can be taken from a point of silence in a bunch of movies, all merged together, and overlaid on top of an audio track all throughout it, disrupting any check for Cinavia.

The downside is, this might make it twice or 3 times as easy to detect, but has it even been tried at all? Shouldn't be hard.

Eza17

18th March 2011, 17:50

So, I find a way to add my own 'cinavia' and it has no chance of affecting the cinavia that is already there? Isn't there any chance that my own 'inaudible' signal would interfere with the existing signal? I wouldn't be trying to remove cinavia, just make it impossible to reliably detect.

MickJT

18th March 2011, 17:53

That's my line of thought. Have multiple Cinavia signals overlaid on top of each other, making it hard (or extremely easy) to detect. Needs to be tried at least once, if it hasn't already.

Ghitulescu

18th March 2011, 17:59

May I point to the fact that the goal is to play a BD (and now a DVD, too). What use to fool the detection routines in the player if the sound is itself a sort of cacophony?

MickJT

18th March 2011, 18:03

You can take a part of Cinavia infected silence (assuming that exists). You wouldn't be able to tell the difference. Of course, you still need to re-encode the audio. Something you'd need to do removing just Cinavia, anyway.

My post on SlySoft, I had a different idea, with less thought put into it, which was about taking any other Cinavia source, silent or not, cloning one channel to another, and inverting, then having the receiver cancel that audio out while downmixing. Crap result, with less channels, but it was basically the same thing.

mayhem2408

18th March 2011, 22:09

You can take a part of Cinavia infected silence (assuming that exists). You wouldn't be able to tell the difference. Of course, you still need to re-encode the audio. Something you'd need to do removing just Cinavia, anyway.

My problem with that is the Cinavia watermark is not affected by background noise, even when rerecorded by camcorder, so I doubt the cinavia watermark would be put into silence. It would actually make sence for it not to be put into silence, making it harder to find and remove.

Ajax_Undone

19th March 2011, 06:58

My problem with that is the Cinavia watermark is not affected by background noise, even when rerecorded by camcorder, so I doubt the cinavia watermark would be put into silence. It would actually make sence for it not to be put into silence, making it harder to find and remove.

http://forum.slysoft.com/showpost.php?p=303746&postcount=630

This idea is something that I find interesting.

Eza17

23rd March 2011, 16:10

Sorry to go on about audio comparisons and I understand that it's hard to get 2 samples the same but aren't there already audio streams out there with and without cinavia? Reading around the web, it seems to indicate that the English blu ray version of Salt has cinavia but other regions don't. If this is the case, wouldn't the non-speaking parts of the audio be the same apart from the english version having cinavia?

Big Vern

3rd April 2011, 09:58

I know this could be a load of hogwash, but I found this on my travels.........

Solution: If you are getting the Cinavia DRM problem with PS3, you can remove the watermark by downloading ‘tunebite’ and converting it to 256kps MP3

Can't see that working, but I thought I would post it nonetheless.

P.S. I have no way of testing this either as I do not have a PS3, nor a Cinavia enabled blu-ray player.

mike20021969

3rd April 2011, 15:46

I know this could be a load of hogwash, but I found this on my travels.........

Solution: If you are getting the Cinavia DRM problem with PS3, you can remove the watermark by downloading ‘tunebite’ and converting it to 256kps MP3

Can't see that working, but I thought I would post it nonetheless.

There's no could be about it.
It is hogwash and doesn't work.

pacaveli211

3rd April 2011, 22:16

and you'd be effectively ruining your audio (IMO anyways)...even if it did work

pandy

4th April 2011, 11:40

Don't have experience with this DRM but maybe lowpass filter 8kHz + SBR to recreate everything over 8kHz can solve temporary this problem?

Don't have recordings but maybe someone affected can check this idea?

smegolas

4th April 2011, 17:06

Synchronisation attack is what I would be looking at.

setarip_old

4th April 2011, 19:28

@smegolas

Hi! Synchronisation attack is what I would be looking at.

1) Would you be good enough to provide a bit of detail regarding your suggested procedure?

2) Have you tried using this procedure with a Cinavia-protected disc? If so, what were the results?

muzzz33

8th April 2011, 21:40

i have read on several websites (psgroove.com is one) that the new media player called showtime for jailbroken ps3's does not trigger the cinavia protection and it also supports mkv's. i have no media with cinavia to try and confirm this ,anyone here fancy having a go?

ron spencer

8th April 2011, 21:51

@smegolas

Hi!

1) Would you be good enough to provide a bit of detail regarding your suggested procedure?

2) Have you tried using this procedure with a Cinavia-protected disc? If so, what were the results?

see here:

http://www.springerlink.com/content/j47t79366320114g/

setarip_old

9th April 2011, 00:24

@ron spencer

Thanks for the link.

It will be interesting to hear back from "smegolas"

setarip_old

9th April 2011, 00:51

@muzzz33

Hi!

What you've described sounds promising. However, upon visiting the "psgroove" website, I was unable to locate any postings stating or confirming that a PS3 that would otherwise be subject to Verance/"Cinavia" protection can, by using the "Showtime" player program, play Verance/"Cinavia-protected Blu-ray discs without incident.

If this is in fact the case, this would represent a very significant breakthrough (as I've suggested on several occasions in this thread since the PS3 was "jailbroken") ;>}

Please be good enough to provide links to posts at "psgroove" or other sources that clearly provide this specific information.

muzzz33

9th April 2011, 17:11

Hi the link below gives an example of the showtime player ignoring cinavia
http://www.digital-kaos.co.uk/forums/f15/cinavia-198938/

setarip_old

9th April 2011, 18:15

Following the link provided by "muzzz33" led me to the following which appears to indicate that a combination of a "Custom FirmWare" (CFW) v.3.55 and a homebrewn player named "Showtime" allows PS3 playback of of Verance/"Cinavia"-protected Blu-ray backup copies without interference by the protection:

http://www.digital-kaos.co.uk/forums/f15/cinavia-198938/#post1047445

If you have CFW just install Showtime
I tried to watch Battle LA on PS3, cinavia kicked in,
switched to Showtime, no cinavia

Additional related/supporting posts can be found by performing the following Googlesearch:

cfw+ps3+showtime

For the benefit of the community, it would be wonderful if any members who have "jailbroken" PS3s could check out and report on the described custom firmware and the "Showtime" player program when used in conjunction with a backup copy of a known Verance/"Cinavia"-protected Blu-ray disc.
(As I've mentioned previously, I do not own a PS3.)

SamuriHL

9th April 2011, 18:54

I have a PS3 but it's not jailbroken so I can't test this. I'd also be very interested to hear first hand testimonials as to how well this "Showtime" player works.

setarip_old

9th April 2011, 19:56

@SamuriHL I'd also be very interested to hear first hand testimonials as to how well this "Showtime" player works.Actually, from what I've read (albeit skimmingly), it sounds like you should be able to use the "Showtime" player for non-Verance/"Cinavia"-protected Blu-ray copies with ANY PS3 (not only "jailbroken" PS3s).

It sounds similar in concept to the oft' spoken of SlySoft player-in-development...

SamuriHL

9th April 2011, 20:13

@SamuriHL Actually, from what I've read (albeit skimmingly), it sounds like you should be able to use the "Showtime" player for non-Verance/"Cinavia"-protected Blu-ray copies with ANY PS3 (not only "jailbroken PS3s).

It sounds similar in concept to the oft' spoken of SlySoft player-in-development...

Hmm. I may have to look into that when I get a chance. From a post Peer made on SlySoft recently, it sounds like they're making progress on SlyPlayer. In any case, I'll see if I can test this out sometime this weekend.

SamuriHL

9th April 2011, 20:17

Actually, this seems worrisome:

Things that do NOT work

-TV-style remote controller has not been tested. No idea if it works or not.

-BD/DVD/CD Discs – No idea how that works

-Digital pass thru audio (AC3, DTS, etc)

And the following:

Most of this should work except for playback of high res. HD videos (basically when the PPU runs out of cycles). There are some methods of fixing them, but no one knows yet. I will update it when they do.

So, it would seem that you would have to convert the video in order to play it? Or am I reading that wrong? That's right from their website, so, I'm guessing this is an issue?

setarip_old

9th April 2011, 23:02

@SamuriHL

Apparently, you've viewed a different website than the ones I've seen (Including the "Showtime" author's home pages)

You might want to check out the following links:

https://www.lonelycoder.com/hts/showtime_overview.html Video playback
Showtime supports all video formats supported by FFmpeg

http://ps3.dashhacks.com/2011/04/07/showtime-it-does-1080p-now

And here's a YouTube example: www.youtube.com/watch?v=pGcrfsWh8d4

(Please keep in mind that I do not own a PS3 - just sharing apparent information)

SamuriHL

9th April 2011, 23:10

I'll take a look at it. I don't have a lot of time right now as I'm trying to get my bedroom machine to have stable playback at 24Hz. I'm finding that with how things are progressing with MPC-HC/LAV Splitter/LAV CUVID/madVR these past few weeks, things are looking up on the PC playback front. Since it's open source it won't ever support Cinavia and can play BD's (assuming protection removed, of course) and MKV's with perfectly clarity and the absolute best PQ I've seen on a PC. Quite frankly, my preferred method for getting around Cinavia is only getting better with time. :) However, if this player on the PS3 works, that's really good news as it's one of the most popular players.

setarip_old

10th April 2011, 03:11

The relevance of my postings to this thread about this "Showtime" player is regarding its (if all proves out) EXTREME potential value, in conjunction with "jailbroken" PS3s, for the multitudes whose primary Blu-ray playback resource is the PS3 - and who until now could only look to Fengtao's somewhat limited "BDMV-REC" solution.

However, it should be noted that the author's website appears to indicate that earlier iterations of the "Showtime" player can also be used directly with computers and/or HTPCs running either Linux or MAC OS/X (Perhaps with some polite requests, a Windows version could also be created).

Although it's premature to state that this player heralds the demise of "Cinavia"/Verance, I will say - with a small smile on my face - that I am quite pleased to see the first such solution being one that results from the "jailbroken" PS3 - just as I had forecasted in this thread when the "jailbreaking" first occurred ;>}

Kudos to Andreas Öman, Project leader and to new member "muzzz33" for bringing it to the attention of the Doom9 Forum members!

muzzz33

10th April 2011, 09:28

Hi again
I have installed the showtime player on fw3.41 on its own and with another application called multiman which is used for my ps3 game backups.
The latest showtime version handles 1080p video and i have tested some movie backups that played ok.
As i mentioned in my previous post i do not have any cinavia protected material to test but if anyone is able to point me to a sample video that will normally trigger the cinavia then i will test showtimes response to it.

Thanks

setarip_old

10th April 2011, 18:13

@muzzz33

From what I've read, in order to test the "Showtime" player's ability to circumvent "Cinavia"/Verance protection you MUST be using a "jailbroken" PS3 (with, IIRC, modified, "Custom FirmWare" version 3.55). If you're willing/able to modify your PS3 accordingly, then for purposes of testing (NOT for permanent retention), you could rent any of the following Blu-ray discs that are confirmed to contain "Cinavia"/Verance watermarking (List is courtesy of the DVDFab Forum):

Blu-ray discs:
The Losers *(Warner Brothers, volume name=THE_LOSERS) (English track only)
The Karate Kid (2010)* (Sony, volume name=THE_KARATE_KID) (most of the tracks)
The Other Guys (Sony, 14dec2010) (English track only)
Resident Evil: Afterlife 2D* (Sony, 28dec2010) (English track only)
Resident Evil: Afterlife 3D* (Sony, 28dec2010) (English track only)
Salt (Sony, 21dec2010) (English track only)
The Social Network (Sony, 11jan2011) (English track only)
Takers (Sony, 18jan2011) (English track only)
Burlesque (Sony, 01mar2011) [NOT CONFIRMED]
The Tourist* (Sony, 22mar2011) (English track only)
How Do You Know (Sony, 22mar2011) [NOT CONFIRMED]
The Green Hornet (Sony, 03may2011) (just announced)
The Green Hornet 3D (Sony, 03may2011) (just announced)
The Roommate (Sony, 17may2011) (just announced)
* for those, in teritories where the movie is not released by Warner Bros. or Sony, the Blu-ray does not have Cinavia

If you choose to modify your PS3 in accordance to the information posted at the website(s)/forums for which you and others have provided links and then proceed with testing any of the above-listed Blu-ray discs known to contain "Cinavia"/Verance watermarking, please post your findings back here ;>}

muzzz33

10th April 2011, 19:39

I decided to buy the takers on dvd as i don't have a bluray drive on my pc, backed it up and tested. 20 mins in on normal player cinavia kicked in with code 3, I then switched to showtime and have just finished watching it with out any problems.
also you do not need to be on a custom firmware, i am on fw3.41 ,you just need to install the package built for the firmware of your choice although it still means i need to use a dongle every time i use showtime.
Anyway it does confirm that showtime bypass's the ps3 cinavia software detection.

setarip_old

10th April 2011, 20:00

@muzzz33 you do not need to be on a custom firmware, i am on fw3.41 ,you just need to install the package built for the firmware of your choice although it still means i need to use a dongle every time i use showtime.For those of us who are not PS3 owners/users, please be good enough to explain the function of the dongle you are using. Is it a hardware solution for "jailbreaking" the PS3 or something else? What's the cost?

Anyway it does confirm that showtime bypass's the ps3 cinavia software detection.Your testing certainly appears to substantiate that ;>}

However, I believe it is still most important for the "Showcase" player to be tested with the NO-cost, "jailbroken" PS3 solution.

Therefore, I'd once again suggest/request that any members (or anyone else) that have "jailbroken" PS3s test the "Showtime" player with a backup copy of one of the Blu-ray discs known to contain the "Cinavia"/Verance watermarking (See my Post #903) and report their findings back here...

SamuriHL

10th April 2011, 20:05

The requirement of having to be jailbroken is a non-starter for me unfortunately. I use my PS3 online for quite a few functions and there is a very big risk of having your console banned in the future using a jailbreak. If it didn't require that or if Sony was a little more lenient about it, I'd consider it, but, not with Sony's current attitude towards it.

setarip_old

10th April 2011, 21:20

@SamuriHL

Of course you should concern yourself (as should all users) with your personal concerns and/or needs regarding your use of the PS3 - although as a non-owner of a PS3, as far as I know, the present primary functions of the PS3 are game playing and watching videos. That said, if you do some research regarding the current state of affairs of the "jailbroken" PS3, you'll note that there are apparently software mods "floating around" that 1) eliminate the need for connecting online in order to play many games and 2) can reverse/erase "banning" data on your PS3.

Additionally, it's been indicated that because of the nature of the "jailbreak", there's nothing that can be done by SONY to rectify the current situation (Too many related apps already out there in the ether) with the present PS3s. It's been stated that only the next new system will (possibly) put SONY back in the driver's seat. Thusfar, SONY's efforts have been to generate lawsuits and try to strongarm hackers into divulging other hackers' names and any data they can get there hands on. In one posting, it was indicated (with a screen cap of the email to support the contention) that SONY tried to hire one of the "jailbreak" hackers, after the fact. He politely declined.

More importantly, the FAR bigger picture here is that, presuming testing with "jailbroken" units supports the findings of "muzzz33", PERMANENT circumvention of the present "Cinavia"/Verance protection may have arrived for PS3s - and since the PS3 apparently represents such a significant portion of the Blu-ray playback market, this would likely stifle its further application to pure standalone players.

Also, let's not forget that the "Showtime" player apparently can also be used for playback under Linux, MAC OS/X and HTPCs. Can a Windows version be far off?

SamuriHL

10th April 2011, 21:27

Windows already has a good solution for Cinavia free playback, but, it's always good to have options. And in my case, it's not just a matter of games. I also use Hulu, Vudu, and Netflix on my PS3 and you have to be signed in to use those. Anyway, having said that, I do agree that this is significant. While it doesn't fix the PS3's player software itself, it does show that it can be circumvented which is a very big deal. As you said, the PS3 is a significant portion of the BD playback market, and is right at the top of those affected by Cinavia at present. This is definitely good for those willing to jailbreak. That and MKV support....NICE :)

muzzz33

11th April 2011, 00:41

The dongle that i use to jailbreak my ps3 was a cheap $15 chinese import. It is a usb dongle that injects a small payload onto the ps3 at start up. It is only required on 3.41 firmware.sony removed the vunerability on later firmwares, that is why there was a need for the custom firmwares.
I chose to stay on an official firmware as there are risks involved in changing to a custom firmware.
The future of the jailbreak scene is still unclear as not all the signing keys are in the wild and only a select few people have the knowledge to decrypt future firmwares. Geohot is one and he is locked in a court case with sony, he has said he will never release the way he hacked lv0 and mtldr.
Unless showtime can be signed like a proper app that can work on future firmwares then i believe only a very small percentage of people will benefit from its cinavia by-pass.

setarip_old

11th April 2011, 03:01

@muzzz33

Perhaps I'm unwittingly creating unnecessary confusion and concern about the word "jailbreak" (as a result of not owning a PS3). Please clarify - Is the following statement the same as saying you have to "jailbreak" your PS3? install CFW (Custom FirmWare) eg Kmeaw, very easy to do.
(usb memory stick required)

install showtime (which is as a pkg which will add it as if it were a downloadable content game.The quote is from the following post:

http://www.digital-kaos.co.uk/forums/f15/cinavia-198938/#post1048224

SamuriHL

11th April 2011, 03:05

Yes, a custom firmware is jailbroken. And that is what can cause us problems.

Ajax_Undone

11th April 2011, 09:17

muzzz33

11th April 2011, 21:56

@setarip_old

the confusing part about what and when you need to jailbreak stems from the fact that when the first way to hack the ps3 was found, you were required to use the usb dongle to jailbreak the ps3 every time you turned it on, this sounds like a chore but it is very quick and easy.that was only suitable for fw3.41 and below to i think fw3.1 ,i could be wrong on that as things move quickly with developments.
after sony updated their firmware you were no longer able to jailbreak with the dongle.this remained the same for a few months and many homebrew projects concentrated on the working 3.41fw.
then the hackers(failoverflow team) discovered that sony had unwittingly gave them the private master key that they use for signing their software,that and keys released from geohot enabled hackers to make custom firmwares with the same type of payload that my dongle uses to permanently jailbreak the ps3, like the one you mentioned from kmeaw .
I may end up moving to the custom firmwares when i need to use a game that requires a higher firmware to run ,until then i am quite happy using the original method.
whether you use showtime with 3.41 fw or any of the custom ones it should not affect how the software runs on the ps3 and cinavia will be ignored just the same.
hope this clears it up a bit .

setarip_old

12th April 2011, 01:28

@muzzz33 hope this clears it up a bit .Very much so. Thank you ;>}

SquallMX

12th April 2011, 16:35

Showtime plays cinavia infected files (MKV, MP4, M2TS) just fine, but not complete Blu-rays or DVDs protected with it. :helpful:

rotty

12th April 2011, 23:37

I think the best solution to the Cinavia problem is to abort the use and sales of these disks. They have not yet hurt the industry big enough to make a notable impact. The reason is The masses are not educated on the destructive power of this mass media take over.

The people need to know that the audio has been tampered with and that true HD sound they hear is cruft and they also need to know what to look for to avoid purchasing content that is protected by cinavia. It hampers creativity in the OSS community, It creates a cost dividend that is spread to the consumers who in turn are made to pay for destroyed useless content. Its a sluff off of every other type of control. As worthless as it is irritating.
I wont support it in any way!

I will say this I have not put one penny towards any Cinavia cruft and I have never updated my PS3 or my bluray players.

This IS and always has been our biggest weapon BY FAR.

I really mean that.

HIT THEM WHERE IT HURTS, SALES FIGURES.

There are too many defeatist out here, if the disk has the Cinavia logo or you know it is infected DONT BUY IT.

We are paying for HD audio and getting tampered with audio, that is reason enough to start with not to buy, let alone the rest of the crap that comes with that.

setarip_old

13th April 2011, 02:46

@SquallMX

Hi!

Actually, there's a post at another website that appears to partially and conditionally contradict your statement:

http://www.ps3news.com/PS3-Hacks-JailBreak/showtime-media-player-ps3-homebrew-port-now-supports-1080p/page-5

Today Andreas Oman has updated his Showtime Media Player HTPC port for the PS3. The new release now includes 1080p playback at a constant speed and unconfirmed DVD playback

Ghitulescu

13th April 2011, 07:36

I think the best solution to the Cinavia problem is to abort the use and sales of these disks. They have not yet hurt the industry big enough to make a notable impact. The reason is The masses are not educated on the destructive power of this mass media take over.

The people need to know that the audio has been tampered with and that true HD sound they hear is cruft and they also need to know what to look for to avoid purchasing content that is protected by cinavia. It hampers creativity in the OSS community, It creates a cost dividend that is spread to the consumers who in turn are made to pay for destroyed useless content. Its a sluff off of every other type of control. As worthless as it is irritating.
I wont support it in any way!

I will say this I have not put one penny towards any Cinavia cruft and I have never updated my PS3 or my bluray players.

It was said before many times, and it's good that more and more people repeat it.

Besides, the American movies considered here to be Blockbuster are generally made for an audience having a mental age of at most 15 years and lack scenarios (they copy European movies) - thus the decision is even easier to make. Other than special effects there's little else ...

setarip_old

13th April 2011, 08:56

@Ghitulescu

As I said in Post #440 to this thread: I started this thread for the purpose of discussing the technical aspects of "Cinavia"..., when I said:

"It will be interesting to see what others may discover when they test their backups of the legitimate commercial BluRay on more current equipment."

Therefore, I'd appreciate it if we could stay on topic in this thread. Certainly, your stated opinion that: Besides, the American movies considered here to be Blockbuster are generally made for an audience having a mental age of at most 15 years and lack scenarios (they copy European movies) - thus the decision is even easier to make. Other than special effects there's little else ... is not in any way relevant to the topic of this thread - and additionally, may be considered by some to be inflammatory...

Ghitulescu

13th April 2011, 09:00

It has to do with 3 solutions to cinavia:
-disable its detection
-remove it
-force the producers to remove it

It worked with the CD, why it won't work with BD?

setarip_old

13th April 2011, 09:53

@Ghitulescu

Once again, your stated opinion that:

Besides, the American movies considered here to be Blockbuster are generally made for an audience having a mental age of at most 15 years and lack scenarios (they copy European movies) - thus the decision is even easier to make. Other than special effects there's little else ...
is not in any way relevant to the topic of this thread - and additionally, may be considered by some to be inflammatory - and has nothing to do with you now re-stating "old news" about obvious GOALS, not solutions, in dealing with "Cinavia"/Verance.

Member to member (and as the OP of this thread), please stay on topic...

Ghitulescu

13th April 2011, 10:05

No need to repeat an obvious taken-out-of-context fragment. It's a solution, as it will do probably one or the other
-either let cinavia in but drop prices (it's cheaper in Germany to buy an original than a BD DL; yes, I know, there is the grey market too but still expensive)
-or to take it out
Either solution works for me, I would nevertheless prefer the second.

mike20021969

13th April 2011, 17:17

@ old_pirates and Ghitulescu
Can you 2 get a room?

setarip_old

13th April 2011, 19:40

@mike20021969

I totally agree with the sentiment you've expressed. As the OP of this thread, I am attempting to prevent it (As I've previously attempted) from becoming yet another thread that some members foul up with OFF TOPIC banter and bickering. "Cinavia"/Verance is too important a topic to be derailed by unrelated postings.

Perhaps the moderators can have more success at this than I have.

scanman1

17th April 2011, 19:29

I am a lurker for the most part, but I can see that there is REAL effort being done on the Sony PS3, as a developer has created a GUI based tool for the sole purpose of decrypting the .pup file of the PS3 BluRay firmware!

The first thing on the list of things to patch will be this pesky Cinavia bug. I'm sure they also plan to study the detection code itself. This is the best platform for dis-assembly of this parasitic code. I'd like to be a fly on the wall in Sony's R & D lab right about now

http://www.ps3hax.net/showthread.php?t=22085

A developer named turusele has released a GUI for decrypting Blu-Ray Disc Player firmware drivers. The app is based off of the work of RichDevX and SeRoCuLtO, who originally developed the decrypter. The app will allow you to easily decrypt/encrypt the updated firmware drivers contained in the official Sony PUP files. Which in turn will allow you to start dissecting the functions of the Blu Ray player to help better understand and modify it.

Thanks to turusele who has made this GUI version of the software BDP Firmware Decrypter which was originally developed by RichDevX and SeRoCuLtO. This is basically a Windows app that will work on x86 or x64. This tool will allow you to easily decrypt/encrypt the updated firmware drivers contained in the PUP files. Basically, this will allow you to start dissecting the functions of the Blu Ray to help better understand them and modify them.

Ghitulescu

18th April 2011, 08:14

derbeDeus

18th April 2011, 09:16

Ghitulescu

18th April 2011, 09:53

Yeah, free advertising to some "pirates" that probably "sell" something else ...

[SLiM]D12

19th April 2011, 16:06

I've been reading for a while on this forum. I have a JB PS3 and installed showtime, but can't figure out how to play an actual BD Disc. From what Samurai posted it appears this feature isn't enabled yet, so i guess people are only testing cinavia infected mkv's at this point?

**EDIT**

Yep here it says it clearly:

Other stuff that does not work
TV-style remote controller (whatever that's called) has not been tested. No idea if it works or not.
BD/DVD/CD Discs - No idea how that works
Digital pass thru audio (AC3, DTS, etc)

Ghitulescu

20th April 2011, 10:04

Here's an example of what happens when people start reading free patent literature -> http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?p=1494245
So, once again
The algorithms are clearly described in the patents. One cannot blindly find out something so resilient to manipulations.

So, using the info provided by Verance, one can disassemble the FW of the player (like with the LG GG*20 before, and region patching for countless DVD drives and players) to remove the detection routine. Nothing else is required.

jordonb

9th May 2011, 02:37

Assuming this is a subaudible sound sombody needs to identify it. A suitable low pass and high pass and or narrow band midrange bandpass filter might wipe it but this is assuming they are not violating the sanction of DTS which is 20hz to 20000hz. As somebody mentioned a visual artifact when the sound cuts out that may also trigger it. Or maybe the cinavia message triggers it and not visa versa if they use an alternate track for a split second. It could be a subtle phase shift in the sound of one of the channels also. It is important to keep an open mind. Equally important is if you buy the disk they should allow viewing it anyway you want. So some of you smart kids may try the above. I'm going to omit the sound track altogether. If that doesnt bring up the message on a PS3 then you can be assured one way or the other if it is truly audible or not and track it down to what channel if not combination of channels they are using. I'm to old for this but if they start doing this to DVDs the game is over unless somebody is thinking outside the box.
Good Luck

rotty

9th May 2011, 21:47

jordonb

9th May 2011, 23:53

setarip_old

10th May 2011, 05:52

@jordonb

Hi!

Although your questions, as standalones, are valid, I'd suggest that if you read through this thread (Yes, it's lengthy, but the topic is worthy of it) you'd see that most, if not all, of them have previously been asked and answered.

Of course, if you find that any have not been asked and answered, the members (myself included) would certainly appreciate you using your ststed expertise to research them - and post your findings back here...

rotty

11th May 2011, 12:35

A couple of questions from an old tech.
Is this on multiple frequencies?
Doesn't this kind of make DTS a joke if they're in the audible range?
Could they be filtered using a band pass filter of any sort or are they changing by an algorithm?
I think the idea that their patent would lead to the solution is a false premise as I believe it is there to throw everybody a curve ball.
Am I Nuts????

The audio is bastardised so yes, the audio is polluted and that does make a joke of supposedly perfect audio.

There are many ways of course to embed a signal within audio, from the downright sledgehammer approach to subtle phase changes and short term echoes etc.

I’m sure that the usual powers such as Slysoft etc are looking at this but its getting on for a year now and nothing on the horizon so don’t hold your breath.

Its also worth remembering that even if Cinavia can be removed, we need it to be removed/disrupted within the existing stream and not to re encode the audio. If we need to re encode then there is some loss there straight away, also we would not have access to professional audio encoder s/w (DTS MA or Dolby MA) so we would be left with either AC3 or LCPM (Massive file).

People power of course being the strongest force, as you have said, it makes a joke of so called DTS HD etc audio and so if the disk has Cinavia embedded and therefore corrupted audio, don’t buy it.

GodofaGap

12th May 2011, 07:05

Its also worth remembering that even if Cinavia can be removed, we need it to be removed/disrupted within the existing stream and not to re encode the audio.
This will be impossible. Cinavia is a property of the uncompressed stream, not of the compressed stream. The possibility of purposefully manipulating a compressed stream is very limited at best.

Re-encoding does also not have to mean loss.

rotty

12th May 2011, 12:54

This will be impossible. Cinavia is a property of the uncompressed stream, not of the compressed stream. The possibility of purposefully manipulating a compressed stream is very limited at best.

Re-encoding does also not have to mean loss.

It is not impossible to alter audio in a compressed state, replacing a slice of MP3 audio in an MP3 editor for example, the newly compressed slice replaces the old in the original stream, but as I said it may well need re encoding.

How will we be able to re encode to high standard in domestic enviroment, i.e. we only have encode software for AC3 and Wav LPCM. Other encoders are either unavailable or out of the budget range.

Slysoft for example will not be able to have professional s/w passed on to us in the proposed CloneBD.

GodofaGap

13th May 2011, 07:42

It is not impossible to alter audio in a compressed state, replacing a slice of MP3 audio in an MP3 editor for example, the newly compressed slice replaces the old in the original stream, but as I said it may well need re encoding.
Well that's not really manipulating the compressed stream now is it? That's just simple cutting and joining. And even that might not be that simple with compressed audio.

Anyway, where are you getting the replacements from? And if you don't have an encoder, how do you get them to be in the right format? And who is saying that replacing parts of an audio stream is going to eliminate Cinavia?

Ghitulescu

13th May 2011, 07:59

Cinavia is a property of the uncompressed stream, not of the compressed stream.

Not really, it withstand compression and it's now found on DVDs in the AC-3 audio track.

rotty

13th May 2011, 08:10

Well that's not really manipulating the compressed stream now is it? That's just simple cutting and joining. And even that might not be that simple with compressed audio.

Anyway, where are you getting the replacements from? And if you don't have an encoder, how do you get them to be in the right format? And who is saying that replacing parts of an audio stream is going to eliminate Cinavia?

I agree, thats what I was saying, how are we going to re encoded to the original quality without a professional quality encoder.

Slysoft say that "they intend to remove this stink", well it will be interesting to see the method.

I suspect that the simplest answer to this is stand alone and s/w players that do not implement Cinavia.

Ghitulescu

13th May 2011, 08:28

I suspect that the simplest answer to this is stand alone and s/w players that do not implement Cinavia.

Not really, as cinavia is now part of AACS agreement, so any HW/SW manufacturer/developer which intends to provide BD playback capability to his product is obliged to implement cinavia detection routines too. The only way to avoid this is to rely on mediatank concept, which would force the consumer to buy 2 players, one for HDDs and one for opticals (well, not a big issue as such, I have several different players, but the general trend is one-device-for-all, and since the market drives the production..., at least in theory).

mike20021969

13th May 2011, 11:39

Slysoft say that "they intend to remove this stink", well it will be interesting to see the method.
As long as no-one holds their breath waiting.

http://forum.slysoft.com/showthread.php?t=41885&page=77

(Posts #768 ~ #770)

rotty

13th May 2011, 15:53

As long as no-one holds their breath waiting.

http://forum.slysoft.com/showthread.php?t=41885&page=77

(Posts #768 ~ #770)

LOL
Hi Mike. It was touch and go for a while but im breathing again now.

rotty

13th May 2011, 15:59

Not really, as cinavia is now part of AACS agreement, so any HW/SW manufacturer/developer which intends to provide BD playback capability to his product is obliged to implement cinavia detection routines too. The only way to avoid this is to rely on mediatank concept, which would force the consumer to buy 2 players, one for HDDs and one for opticals (well, not a big issue as such, I have several different players, but the general trend is one-device-for-all, and since the market drives the production..., at least in theory).

Hi Ghitulescu hope your well, for the s/w player I was thinking of the Slysoft PC player. Its not out yet and I dont know much about it but Ive seen a lot of chat on forum(s).

Im like you, I prefere a stand alone player so hope some other solution appears.

setarip_old

15th May 2011, 04:08

@muzzz33 I decided to buy the takers on dvd as i don't have a bluray drive on my pc, backed it up and tested. 20 mins in on normal player cinavia kicked in with code 3, I then switched to showtime and have just finished watching it with out any problems.
also you do not need to be on a custom firmware, i am on fw3.41 ,you just need to install the package built for the firmware of your choice although it still means i need to use a dongle every time i use showtime.
Anyway it does confirm that showtime bypass's the ps3 cinavia software detection.Are you saying that the "Showtime" player is capable of playing FULL DISC backups of Blu-ray discs on a PS3? - or something else, such as an .M2TS file, an .MKV file, etc.

GodofaGap

16th May 2011, 08:30

Not really, it withstand compression and it's now found on DVDs in the AC-3 audio track.
Ok, so your English is failing you again. :p

I didn't say cinavia doesn't withstand compression. I only said that is a property of the uncompressed audio data. This means what you can do to remove it on a compressed stream and at the same time keep that compressed stream valid is very limited.

You will have to decompress the stream for any attempt at removal of cinavia.

Ghitulescu

16th May 2011, 09:04

Ok, so your English is failing you again. :p

I didn't say cinavia doesn't withstand compression. I only said that is a property of the uncompressed audio data. This means what you can do to remove it on a compressed stream and at the same time keep that compressed stream valid is very limited.

You will have to decompress the stream for any attempt at removal of cinavia.

Of course, one has to decompress the stream in order to perform anything thereupon, except stream copy. :)
You said however a property, not an action performed upon. And this property "survives" compression, lossy or not.

GodofaGap

17th May 2011, 08:34

You said however a property, not an action performed upon. And this property "survives" compression, lossy or not.
Which contradicts nothing I said.

My point was that rotty's wish of keeping the stream in its compressed form while still wanting to remove Cinavia is impossible. If I thought that compressed streams couldn't cary Cinavia I wouldn't have to make this point.

rotty

17th May 2011, 19:15

Which contradicts nothing I said.

My point was that rotty's wish of keeping the stream in its compressed form while still wanting to remove Cinavia is impossible. If I thought that compressed streams couldn't cary Cinavia I wouldn't have to make this point.

I wasnt saying that Cinavia or indeed any audio could either be detected or altered in a compressed state.
Just that changing portions can be achived without the whole stream being altered. Even then you would have to de-compress, read, then re encode those sections. Even then, re encoded using what encoder.

I would guess not much use for this particular problem. Cinavia is throughout the existing audio.

So as I said originally, I think that it would have to be re encoded.

I suppose if it is beaten via removal or dissruption, then we will have to put up with lossy re encode codecs.

All to do with Piracy, or is it ego.

SamuriHL

17th May 2011, 19:19

Or leave it as LPCM, which is what it gets decoded to. Those of us that use other containers besides BD could consider using FLAC. Maybe a TrueHD encoder could be developed. They have a decoder for it. But yes, it must be decoded first. That's how it even detects it in the first place. The player must decode it as it's being played even if it's bitstreamed.

Kerry56

18th May 2011, 20:45

This is a new twist (at least for me)....a disk purchased at retail with Cinavia that will not play on a PS3: http://arstechnica.com/civis/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=1145060

SamuriHL

18th May 2011, 20:49

That seems like a nasty little bug. What title is that if you don't mind me asking?

Kerry56

18th May 2011, 20:54

The original poster in that thread hasn't mentioned the name of the movie yet. I asked in that thread....we'll see if he responds.

setarip_old

18th May 2011, 21:43

I'd speculate that despite that poster's statement, the purchased Blu-ray disc is NOT a legitimate, commercial disc...

SamuriHL

18th May 2011, 21:46

Yea, that seems rather likely doesn't it? I've never seen a case where the PS3 misidentified an original, commercial disc as untrusted. If that happens, that'd be one serious bug in the Cinavia detection code. But, yea, you're speculation very well may be correct.

derbeDeus

18th May 2011, 23:21

It's most likely not a legit. In the description it says that the playback stopped: probably a message 1.

setarip_old

19th May 2011, 02:14

SamuriHL

19th May 2011, 02:21

ROFLMAO! Yea, that must have been what happened. LOL! :) Good to know that the PS3 doesn't have a super flaw that flags original discs as untrusted. :)

whurlston

19th May 2011, 03:52

In line with my (our) initial speculation, the OP at the arstechnica forum is now "backtracking", saying that the store may have been duped into purchasing (and reselling) other-than-legitimate product ;>}

Just to clarify, the OP (erratic) did not backtrack. The statement that the store may have been duped was made by another forum member (nofundsleft) who was also speculating.

setarip_old

19th May 2011, 04:02

@whurlston

Hi!

Actually, both you and I are in error. The post I referred to was made by "tenton".

In any case, unless of course that it's proven, I see no purpose/benefit/need in pursuing this any further in this thread...

whurlston

19th May 2011, 05:17

@whurlston

Hi!

Actually, both you and I are in error. The post I referred to was made by "tenton".Ah, you are correct. My mistake.

In any case, unless of course that it's proven, I see no purpose/benefit/need in pursuing this any further in this thread... Agreed, although I strongly suspect that tenton (and everyone here) is correct.

I would be curious to know the name of the movie. It's an interesting thread to watch for sure.

Kerry56

22nd May 2011, 01:37

I sent a pm to erratic over at ArsTechnica asking for the name of the movie he was having trouble with. He sent word back that the movie was Coraline. The movie was shrink wrapped and appeared totally legitimate. He sent it back to the publisher and has been given a dvd version, and a full refund.

He lives in Australia and bought the movie at what is apparently a large chain of electronic stores called JB HiFi.

SamuriHL

22nd May 2011, 01:45

Can't be the US release of Coraline as it came out before Cinavia if I remember right. I still find this to be suspect, but, that's just speculation, of course. Seems a bit strange.

setarip_old

22nd May 2011, 03:02

@SamuriHL Can't be the US release of Coraline as it came out before Cinavia if I remember right.Actually, the initial US release of "Coraline" was in August of 2009 - and included both a 2D version and an oldstyle anaglyph (red and green glasses for viewing) 3D version.

A couple/few months ago, "Coraline" was re-released in the newer stereoscopic 3D format...

SamuriHL

22nd May 2011, 03:06

And does this new re-release have confirmed Cinavia on it?

setarip_old

22nd May 2011, 03:52

I don't own it, so I can't state with absolute certainty. However, it's not included in the listings maintained at DVDFab Forum, nor could I find any "Coraline"/"Cinavia" - related postings anywhere else. Only references were to April 2011 UK release.

If your curiosity is really piqued (Mine is not, because I'm sure that such a flawed LEGITIMATE commercial release would be VERY newsworthy), I guess you might try finding out if it's in any retail stores in your neck of the woods...

Accident

6th June 2011, 03:42

Even though all this chatter about re-encoding audio to some other format is all interesting and all, has anyone started looking at detecting the audio-mark with dsp or similar, or RE on the early decrypted firmware capable of detecting the signal?

Is there a thread with better noise/signal ratio?

dvgeek

14th June 2011, 06:28

Just popped a backup DVD (from a DVD not a BluRay) of "Just Do It" into my PS3 and I can't believe it that Cinavia kicked in.

setarip_old

14th June 2011, 08:50

@dvgeek

Hi!

Does the original, commercial DVD and/or its packaging display the "Cinavia" logo?

derbeDeus

14th June 2011, 11:11

Just popped a backup DVD (from a DVD not a BluRay) of "Just Do It" into my PS3 and I can't believe it that Cinavia kicked in.

Just do it? what movie is that

setarip_old

14th June 2011, 14:51

"Just Do It" is a Korean comedy released on DVD in 2003. Highly unlikely this contained "Cinavia" ;>}

I'm guessing the poster actually meant "Just Go With It", released a week or two ago on DVD and Blu-ray - although I've seen no other mention that this title, in either format, contains "Cinavia" (Except for an exact duplicate of this post at the SlySoft Forum)...

derbeDeus

14th June 2011, 17:49

setarip_old

14th June 2011, 20:13

@dvgeek

What specific "Cinavia" warning popped up?

rotty

28th June 2011, 16:12

When buying or looking at disks on Amazon and alike, you can make customer reviews/comments on any disk.

If we see a disk that we know is Cinavia watermarked then how about we make a review/comment something like this for example:

Great film, but I for one will NOT be buying simply because the audio on this disk has been polluted by Cinavia watermarking.

I think Joe Public has a right to know.

derbeDeus

29th June 2011, 12:48

Good idea, but...
look at the mess there is on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cinavia. What makes you think they'll be very accurate in the reviews? Please remember that there are discs with Cinavia logo on the box that don't have it and the other way around and there is no easy way to test for "Cinavia for BD" available yet.

laserfan

29th June 2011, 13:19

look at the mess there is on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cinavia.Couple interesting things in there:

On June 5, 2009, the licensing agreements for AACS were finalized, which were updated to make Cinavia detection on commercial Blu-ray disc players a requirement.
I think we all knew this, but I wonder if anyone knows of any set-top players that have been "upgraded" via a firmware change to detect Cinavia? So far just PS3 I think? To-date everything I've read says any player designs pre-2009 can NOT be made to detect Cinavia with a simple firmware update.

Also: who here knows what the "Telesync or Cam" Cinavia movie category is referring to?

Ghitulescu

29th June 2011, 13:34

Are you implying here that the new cinavia-SDK for eg chipsets (Sigma Designs) cannot be introduced in the firmware?

Wikipedia is not an authoritative source. It's as reliable as the editor is. This info is an insider info, but I really think we're seen just rumours. At most separate examples united to a general concept, which may not be necessarily true.

Accident

29th June 2011, 13:36

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telesync

laserfan

29th June 2011, 14:33

Are you implying here that the new cinavia-SDK for eg chipsets (Sigma Designs) cannot be introduced in the firmware?
I've seen zero evidence that Cinavia can be newly introduced to pre-2009 settop players via firmware, PS3 excepted as I already said.

Ghitulescu

29th June 2011, 17:19

I own a pre-2009 gear and the last FW took away its ability to play AVCHD discs (as reported - I "missed" some 8 or 9 FW upgrades since I've bought it :) and it still works even with the newest titles) but no reports concerning cinavia. This is why I always suggest to resist as hard as possible and do not upgrade/update the FW....
I think the last time when I saw an improvement in upgrading was 2002-2003, since then every single FW actually downgraded the performances/abilities ...
It's still premature I think, there are extremely few titles containing cinavia.

hello_hello

29th June 2011, 21:35

I just bought a Blu-ray player for a relative. The criteria was not too expensive, able to play MKV, MP4 and AVI encodes correctly, and no Cinavia. None of the models I looked at supported Cinavia. I settled on a fairly new model Sony player. Still no Cinavia.

Is Cinavia really much of an issue when it comes to standalone devices? I know it's supposed to be implemented in all players but it seems you've really got to go out of your way to find one.
The player I bought works perfectly, so I can't imagine updating it's firmware, ever.

I own a pre-2009 gear and the last FW took away its ability to play AVCHD discs

That's almost funny. I'm glad I use a PC for playback. How do you play your "industry standard" AVCHD discs now?

setarip_old

30th June 2011, 02:23

@hello_hello Is Cinavia really much of an issue when it comes to standalone devices? Presently, NO. Near term and longer term, potentially YES...

Ghitulescu

30th June 2011, 08:36

I just bought a Blu-ray player for a relative. The criteria was not too expensive, able to play MKV, MP4 and AVI encodes correctly, and no Cinavia. None of the models I looked at supported Cinavia. I settled on a fairly new model Sony player. Still no Cinavia.
fair new is vague. 370 and up will have cinavia.

That's almost funny. I'm glad I use a PC for playback. How do you play your "industry standard" AVCHD discs now?
The ironic irony is that you don't see that it's because of the PC that the standalones will suffer, too, as collateral damage. Almost every CP mechanism that was designed was involved in preventing a PC doing a 1:1 digital (lossless) copy or concerned the recorders but not the players.

And please read about intel insider if you're concerned about the PC as a playback device, but not from intel HP, or replace there unlock by lock ;).

Lighto

30th June 2011, 10:35

hello_hello

30th June 2011, 16:13

fair new is vague. 370 and up will have cinavia.

I have a friend who owns a 370. I bought the 380.
They don't.

The ironic irony is that you don't see that it's because of the PC that the standalones will suffer, too, as collateral damage.

I see it, but regardless of which excuses you use to try to justify it, an industry standard device which won't play industry standard discs after an industry standard firmware update.... it is a little funny.

And please read about intel insider if you're concerned about the PC as a playback device, but not from intel HP, or replace there unlock by lock ;).

I'm not concerned. When I update my current PCs I'll have the parts and current software for creating two dedicated playback PCs. They should serve me well for a long time.

Ghitulescu

30th June 2011, 17:45

AVCHD is not an industry standard. It's a subset of Blu-ray, designed for HD camcorders owners. It doesn't comprise any -ROM specs, only writable/rewritable media (DVDR, BDR, SD). There will never be a mdovie released as AVCHD (no subtitles, no HD audio, not even the second audio for the second official language of some states within US). Since I haven't upgraded I have no idea what restrictions were imposed.
PS3 was the test for cinavia. And since it's mandatory, they'll upgrade every upgradable player. Like your players...
Now, again it's funny. Any cinavia enabled standalone will play any cinavia enabled disc (never heard any complaints). Only the copies will not be played. What kind of copies? Well, since one cannot use standalones to make such copies, they can only be made using a PC. So, the next generation of CPUs will implement copyprotections deep within. Start piling old components, you'll need them ;)
Or even cheaper, start writing your congressman to outlaw these things.

rotty

30th June 2011, 18:56

And since it's mandatory, they'll upgrade every upgradable player.

This is the most important point of all. People asking what players are Cinavia enabled and wanting lists of those player models are are just completely missing the point. ALL PLAYERS (that are able to be) WILL, IN TIME BE CINAVIA ENABLED.

Heads need to be got out of the sand. People saying this only affects a few titles are also adding to the complacency. This time next year most titles will be. When enough Disks are out there and already bought and in our collections, the big switch on will happen.

And if anyone thinks that this can be avoided by not upgrading their player then think again, new titles after that point will not play unless the player is upgraded.

Stop this at source. This control of the paying law abiding public must end.

hello_hello

2nd July 2011, 02:05

PS3 was the test for cinavia. And since it's mandatory, they'll upgrade every upgradable player. Like your players...

Which players? The players you previously told me already have Cinavia. Are you offering fact or just speculating?

Now, again it's funny. Any cinavia enabled standalone will play any cinavia enabled disc (never heard any complaints). Only the copies will not be played. What kind of copies? Well, since one cannot use standalones to make such copies, they can only be made using a PC.

The player I just bought will no doubt spend far more time playing encodes than actual BluRay discs. I won't update it's firmware. If and when I find a disc it won't play, I'll encode it.

So, the next generation of CPUs will implement copyprotections deep within. Start piling old components, you'll need them ;)

Do you have a crystal ball??
What's funny, is copy protections might give those old components a long, useful life. My current dual and quad core PCs will be getting upgraded shortly. The old MB/CPUs will eventually become dedicated media players. In a couple of years I'll upgrade them again. That's four dedicated media players without any copy protection woes. Should last me a fair while.

hello_hello

2nd July 2011, 02:13

This is the most important point of all. People asking what players are Cinavia enabled and wanting lists of those player models are are just completely missing the point. ALL PLAYERS (that are able to be) WILL, IN TIME BE CINAVIA ENABLED.

What makes me somewhat sceptical is that Cinavia detection on commercial Blu-ray disc players was made a requirement two years ago. Two years later and you've got to go out of your way to find a player which includes Cinavia, even in current model Sony players. Why?

I wonder if it'll be like DVD region codes where initially every player seemed to adhere to them, then "unlock codes" for most players began appearing until in the end I'm not sure there's many players which even enforce region codes any more.

setarip_old

2nd July 2011, 03:48

rotty

2nd July 2011, 19:14

Although the doomsayers MAY eventually be proven correct, I remain optimistic. More than 1/2 the world's installed base of Blu-ray play capable hardware is comprised of PS3s. As is well-known, "Geo Hot" and others have "jailbroken" and reverse engineered various aspects of the PS3. The "Showtime player" provides Blu-ray playback capability on "jailbroken" (either directly or via dongle) PS3s.
(This may very well be a contributing factor to the thusfar minimal application of "Cinavia"/Verance protection)

I wouldn't be surprised to eventually find out that others continue to work "behind the scenes" to develop products and/or methods to either circuvent or eliminate "Cinavia"/Verance protection.

Well Setarip I hope your right. I'm sure you would agree, there are times when it's good to be proved right but equally good in many cases to be proved wrong, this is such a case.

But, just because I dont agree with you that dosent make me a doomsayer. It makes them someone with an opinion as valid and as much of a contribution as yours.

There certainly isnt any point in arguing re this topic as time will answer it once and for all.

I think that it will be possible to break Cinavia, its just that its not that practical in the domestic enviroment, i.e. re encoding HD lossless audio and the removal butchery may be worse than the watermark itself.

The best answer is the one you hope for and thats up to us all.

A lot of money has been put into this and all later players will be activated you can bet your life. They know its unpopular and so will wait, but as you know it is now basically mandatory within the spec.

However, financial matters overrule everything so ....................
It wont come to pass if we dont let it.

hello_hello

3rd July 2011, 00:10

A lot of money has been put into this and all later players will be activated you can bet your life. They know its unpopular and so will wait, but as you know it is now basically mandatory within the spec.

It's been mandatory for a couple of years. How can something be mandatory while at the same time all the manufacturers can sit on their hands for a few years before implementing it? Is it a conspiracy? Aren't their laws regarding that sort of thing?

Midzuki

3rd July 2011, 08:22

So, the next generation of CPUs will implement copyprotections deep within.

No problemos, man. Even a Blu-Ray player can be emulated in software, and a minimalistic and dedicated operating shisutemu will be written and compiled, if necessary. :devil: :cool: :) :p :D

Ghitulescu

3rd July 2011, 12:51

hello_hello

3rd July 2011, 16:22

While I agree that there's no uncrackable protection, I have to say that the new protections are way above the level of Joe Doe, especially for those that ripping a DVD/BD/CD means the download of the latest *** software and click RUN/START (software that actually does the dirty job for them).

How are these newer copy protections different from older copy protections in that respect? Can the average Joe Doe rip a copy protected DVD without the aid of third party software doing the dirty work for them? Can the average Joe Doe even copy a protected VHS tape by removing the macrovision themselves, or do they still require third party hardware/software to remove it for them?

As I like to repeat myself, this have to be regulated at the legislations' level (the copyright eventually expire, the copyprotection must never be circumvented). It's like the state grants you free entrace to a museum, but you are not allowed to touch the handle of the door to get in. Wake up people!

What makes you think everyone else is asleep? It seems fairly obvious the laws (in the US at least) which allow you to make a backup copy of copyrighted material you own are in contradiction with the laws which forbid the reverse engineering of copy protection.

I guess you must have been too busy repeating yourself to answer my questions. Do you know my players will eventually have Cinavia enabled via a firmware update or are you just offering speculation as fact?
How do you know the next generation of CPUs will have copy protection built in?

xkodi

4th July 2011, 09:20

BTW, "Cinavia" protection is removed on PS3 with latest REBUG firmware, here is what the changelog of the release says:

FEATURE – Cinavia protection disabled

but you can visit REBUG webpage for more details about the project and their latest release.

Ghitulescu

4th July 2011, 09:27

It's only half (or very little ) speculation concerning both aspects: that your and your friends' players will eventually end "upgraded" to cinavia, unless you/your friend chose not to upgrade. However, according to the cinavia agreement the manufacturer is not allowed to tell the public (in the firmware log) when cinavia will be implemented but to use standard clauses like "Various playback improvements" and, as usual, there's no way back (flashing a lower AKA uncinavied version of the FW). People might be tricked to upgrade, but what harm is that, everyone uses only originals/legal obtained media, don't they?
The intel insider is no speculation at all, the next CPUs will have DRM protections inside (which, well, this is speculating, HD video is a fact, HD audio is rumoured). In combination with a new window OS (vista-like, which vista served, like ME, to test the customers acceptance) that will mean ... you're smart enough to figure it out yourself.

derbeDeus

4th July 2011, 20:47

It's been mandatory for a couple of years. How can something be mandatory while at the same time all the manufacturers can sit on their hands for a few years before implementing it? Is it a conspiracy? Aren't their laws regarding that sort of thing?

Why are you so sure that they didn't implement it yet?

Let's talk a bit about strategy here:
First PS3 firmware to implement Cinavia detector was released in November 2009. First BD to have Cinavia was made/released around June/July 2010. So if you had a PS3, not only that you were not notified when you upgraded to 3.10 that you'll install a Cinavia detector, but at that time you didn't even know what that is and how's gonna do any harm to your backup/streaming habits. Ppl tried back then to track it... was it 3.15, was it 3.10?

What makes you think that Sony implemented Cinavia detector only in one product and not in the others? Because they had different processors? Verance site already said that they had detectors for multiple procs. Was it a test? Why would you test on the most popular product, at first?

Ppl assume that one by one manufacturers will start complying to the license and will be implementing Cinavia detector that will refuse to play backup copies or bootleg cam discs. But that will affect sales, nobody will buy their player anymore. At least not until all manufacturers will have Cinavia in place.
It's a fact that they won't be able to implement it at the same time. So how do you solve the problem? Nobody wants to be first.

At the moment there are two "brave" pioneers: PS3 (the bd player that you buy for other reasons) and the Hi-end BD players (whose users are not interested to backup discs). LG was the odd one out, but they went back (in the hide;) ) quickly.

I think the strategy here is to not let the users know which player implemented Cinavia yet, so the sales are not biased. Let everyone (manufacturers) implement it. That takes time, lots of it. And when the time is right, when users have bought with high confidence (Sony players or other brands), the bomb ticks and in a short time, every player will have Cinavia detector enabled.
I don't know if it's a time-triggered "bomb" or the firmwares will "call home" to ask "ready to activate?" My bet is that they are in "deployment phase" still and that, aside from the public licenses that manufacturers have to implement Cinavia, they also had secret (for obvious reasons) agreements, not to activate it before being told to do so.

BTW, "Cinavia" protection is removed on PS3 with latest REBUG firmware, here is what the changelog of the release says:

FEATURE – Cinavia protection disabled

but you can visit REBUG webpage for more details about the project and their latest release.
Nice one. What did they do? disable the callbacks for M1 and M3? :)

hello_hello

5th July 2011, 07:13

Why are you so sure that they didn't implement it yet?

I tested it on a couple of players.

What makes you think that Sony implemented Cinavia detector only in one product and not in the others?

Because aside from the PS3 Sony don't seem to have implemented Cinavia. I'll admit I haven't checked every model Bluray player they make.

Because they had different processors? Verance site already said that they had detectors for multiple procs. Was it a test? Why would you test on the most popular product, at first?

Because all the other devices are Bluray players??

derbeDeus

5th July 2011, 07:20

I tested it on a couple of players.

Because aside from the PS3 Sony don't seem to have implemented Cinavia. I'll admit I haven't checked every model Bluray player they make.

How did you check? Did you look into the firmware?