Opinons on the key file?

[jdobbs]

For those who received the Pro Version last night, what do you think of the new key mechanism? Do you think it's easy enough? I'm trying to limit distribution of the software without being too intrusive.

So far it appears the most common source of problems was in naming it with a ".key" extension. Several folks tried to execute it and got an error message from XP saying it wasn't a valid registry key. It also appears that I wasn't clear enough in my e-mail as to what to do with it. All you really have to do is copy it to the directory that contains REBUILDER.EXE. Nothing more.

Feekback is welcome.

(Added Note: The "Error 13" some folks got that was corrected in v0.93.1 was not related to the keying at all).

[buzzqw]

Not a big problem, download one file or two isn't a problem.

if you think this is a good choice for you rights so it's good also for me (what a bad english...)

BHH

[Fiebre]

I like this. Personally I had no problems with it at all; just put it in the folder the executable created and ran slick.

[valnar]

I did have to read your email a couple times as it wasn't clear where to put it, but I figured it out. ;)

Robert

[jptheripper]

works fine

[ScooterMyth]

Received the email last night. Read the text slowly without moving lips and it installed perfectly. Downloaded the key file and placed it where I was told to place it and started DVD-RB without a problem. This protection will work fine just as long as the PRO version is not available for public download. Anything requiring a "key file" is crackable and will be pirated quickly if available.

[jdobbs]

Originally posted by ScooterMyth
Received the email last night. Read the text slowly without moving lips and it installed perfectly. Downloaded the key file and placed it where I was told to place it and started DVD-RB without a problem. This protection will work fine just as long as the PRO version is not available for public download. Anything requiring a "key file" is crackable and will be pirated quickly if available. Yeah. That worries me. It seems like a lot of work to steal software that exists so far on donations alone. But no matter what method you use, it seems, someone will hack it or get around it somehow. There were a couple of times in earlier versions when someone posted his/her personal copy on BitTorrent... and the trickle of donations turned into a complete stop. I'm not sure there is much I can do besides ban the person who distributes it.

Of course I could always trust the inherent honesty of mankind.
;)

[artoor]

hehe... before I read changelog I put the licence key to DVD-RB folder :D end it works :) Great solution jdobbs.

[hobyho]

I have no issues with the new protection scheme as well. In my opinion it is not intrusive at all, and works fine. Do what you have to do to protect your work jdobbs.

Again thanks for your work on an excellent piece of software. :)

[borgraf]

works like a charm, and it's simple enough :)

[Rippraff]

Besides the runtime error 13 no problems. ;)

Originally posted by ScooterMyth
This protection will work fine just as long as the PRO version is not available for public download. Anything requiring a "key file" is crackable and will be pirated quickly if available.
100% my opinion.
Now since RB Pro is public for download I fear that it will not take very long until a crack version can be found.

Originally posted by jdobbs
Yeah. That worries me. It seems like a lot of work to steal software that exists so far on donations alone. But no matter what method you use, it seems, someone will hack it or get around it somehow. There were a couple of times in earlier versions when someone posted his/her personal copy on BitTorrent... and the trickle of donations turned into a complete stop. I'm not sure there is much I can do besides ban the person who distributes it.
Black sheep exists everywhere, but now you have to compare the number of people on your VIP list with all others who want to steal your work. :angry:

Just my two cents.

Cu Rippraff

[jdobbs]

I would have just continued with my previous distribution method -- but my current 768Kbs outgoing connection is the fastest available, and as soon as 3-4 people would start downloading it would crawl and the "what's wrong with your suck-ass system" e-mails started coming in. And that was before the installation package which comes in at 4.75MB. Hosting somewhere else (out of my administrative control) is pretty much a guarantee that versions would start floating around -- and I couldn't confidently conclude it was distributed by the same person to whom it was registered. So this was my choice on the horns of a dilemma.

I'm certainly open to suggestions -- and it is very possible it may change again before v1.00.

[samuelal]

jdobbs.

All went a-ok with the deployment of the v0.93.1 over here.
Downloaded the .zip version + .key.

All was smooth.

Thanks again for your concern!

[RaistlinMajere]

Found the key file very easy to use. Nicely implimented

With the regularity of which you update the program if you change the keys for each version and Vip members download the tiny sized individual key from your server and the main part of the program from somewhere like doom9 you should be able to keep ahead of the hackers. By time someone took the effort to hack it and post it on a warez site a new version would most likely be available. Anyone posting a key could be banned and the posted key would be only good for that version, minimizing damage.

Why do people seek to rip off someone who puts in so much hard work and time into a program that is also available freely if you don't mind been a few versions behind.

[bteamfox]

When I installed from 0.92 to 0.93.1 I got "key file missing" then I thought wally, forgot to but the .key file in the folder. I was going to double click it but didn't as I wasn't sure if I need to or not so I tried running RB. I got error 13. At this point I decide to Download the Installer version of 0.93.1. Installed, place .key folder and bingo it ran. As a windows user for a long time I was tempted to try and double click the .key file as I thought you should, was just luck I didn't, as I wanted to make sure if I needed to or not. Dont know why it didnt work when I replaced 0.92 exe with 0.93 exe. I guess I had a file missing or something. Anyway the Installer version was much nicer to use. I thing I would like included in the installer version is a .bat file with this in it -

REM Run DVD Rebuilder in low cpu mode.
start /low rebuilder.exe

as you dont have a cpu priorty setting this does make my pc more usable whilst encoding. (Just a thought).

My thoughts on the .key file protection system is personnly I like it because -

I buy software & Key. I can install on my pc. I can save my Purchased software and key to a CD/RVD. If ever my pc needs reinstalling, I just install RB and copy the key file over and away I go again. (I dont have to request another key and have to wait for it, like some software). I know all programs get cracked but for me as a legitimate user I am happy with this protection. I guess If I lose my key file I can request it to be emailed to me again anyway.

People that let there keys out into the wild should be breaking your terms and conditions of use and there fore they forfit the right to use the software and get banned from upgrades or what ever you want to do to them,(electric chair maybe) ;) If a crack is made for RB Pro then Release and updated version with say an extra new feature which needs a new key.

I guess it also makes a differerance if the software will have a Set price or will remain donation ware, Pro version Set Price, non pro version donation ware? You could make the pro version so the the key is a for life key. The non free donation ware version would work for a month say then people would have to download a new version for the next month this would encourage them to donate enough to buy a full key license?

Well that's my thoughts any way

To sum up I like this system.

[jdobbs]

You're right about the urge to double click on the file. I got a few e-mails today from folks who did. It gave them a "this ain't no registry key" error... maybe I could come up with another extension besides ".key" and have Rockas register it when it installs. That way DVD-RB would execute when the key was double-clicked -- and would copy to the correct directory.

[bteamfox]

I don't know how many character you can have for and extension for sure in windows but I have not seen any thing more then three so why not simpley use ".RBP"? The method you mention of installing the extenstion on install then peopl double clicking the ".RBP" file which would then install the file into the correct place sounds good to me. :)

[Rockas]

Originally posted by jdobbs
You're right about the urge to double click on the file. I got a few e-mails today from folks who did. It gave them a "this ain't no registry key" error... maybe I could come up with another extension besides ".key" and have Rockas register it when it installs. That way DVD-RB would execute when the key was double-clicked -- and would copy to the correct directory.
I guess that would be an easy thing to do :)
I was plannig to do it with the .rbd files, anyway :)

[TECK]

Originally posted by jdobbs
You're right about the urge to double click on the file. I got a few e-mails today from folks who did. It gave them a "this ain't no registry key" error... maybe I could come up with another extension besides ".key" and have Rockas register it when it installs. That way DVD-RB would execute when the key was double-clicked -- and would copy to the correct directory.
Something like .lic will solve the problem. What do you think of an encrypted name?
Like adsfh68sadhgag46.lic to protect user's identity...

[robot1]

I had no problems with the .key file. Probably a new extension would be better.
A suggestion: when you start DVD-Rb without the keyfile, instead of throwing an error, could you open a filebrowser window to locate the file (so DVD-RB copies it in the right location)?
Registering the extension (for doubleclickers...) could be a good idea too.

[jdobbs]

Originally posted by TECK
Something like .lic will solve the problem. What do you think of an encrypted name?
Like adsfh68sadhgag46.lic to protect user's identity... That's exactly the opposite of what I want. If someone spreads a key around -- I want everyone to see his/her e-mail address...

[Rippraff]

Originally posted by TECK
Something like .lic will solve the problem. What do you think of an encrypted name?
Like adsfh68sadhgag46.lic to protect user's identity...
Funny idea! If users use only their own version, there's no need to encrypt the name. If not jdobbs will be glad to see who's the bad guy... :sly:

Cu Rippraff

Edit: to slow... ;)

[Axlemar]

Well, for a retail version there has to be some sort of serial / key license system. The bad thing about the key file is that it can eventually be messed with, but I guess that is the same with everything. The most effective way to track it would be to make it call home to some database and check that the key / serial in use matches up and is currently in use by one person, but that would be a pain and might cause other problems. I personally think the key file works fine for now.

Also, it would seem to be a bad idea to not encrypt the file since there is a chance someone could guess or find the address of other users.

[p200002]

I wasn't able to download key file because the server could not be found. Any one has similar problem?

[Axlemar]

My key is still downloadable.

[p200002]

couldn't figure out why, now it seemed OK. Is dvd-rb.com new domain just registered, jdobbs?

[Rockas]

Also, it would seem to be a bad idea to not encrypt the file since there is a chance someone could guess or find the address of other users.
Well I guess that can happen but it will be very hard to guess the "contents" of the file, don't ya think? http://www.thestylemachine.com/smileys/juas.gif

[MCFish]

Originally posted by Axlemar
The most effective way to track it would be to make it call home to some database and check that the key / serial in use matches up and is currently in use by one person, but that would be a pain and might cause other problems.
Also, it would seem to be a bad idea to not encrypt the file since there is a chance someone could guess or find the address of other users.

Online checking is a bad idea for a program not related to the internet at all. Its only usable for gamebrowsers, mailservers etc.
Many people use dvdrb on computers not connected at all(why should they be for rb), so you cant force them to just to allow dvdrb to start. wouldnt be fair.
Content of key, seems encrypted allready. and guessing of address is doable without dvdrb :) one can guess anything. i personally think the address should be left outta the whole keyfile thing. a name would have been enough. jdobbs could still see whodunnit. but it will also force people to take better care of their files in its current state.

[jdobbs]

I obviously don't agree. The e-mail address is the single most important thing that keeps it from being distributed. I can assure you that will never change.

The one alternative I'm thinking of is a two part key. You get the key and then have to register it with your e-mail address. That way if it did get distributed without the address it wouldn't work... unless the address accompanied it.

[MCFish]

ok ok :)

Yes. sounds good if you can make that work. how do you make an email activate the key without a reference to a valid email? then every key must have its email embedded in encrypted form? lol, im outta my league here. does that make sense?

[jdobbs]

You don't necessarily need the key embedded... there are lots of ways you could do that with a single byte or two. The important part is that there is a a "shared secret"... which is what the address would be in that scenario.

[MCFish]

sounds good. if that dont alter the keyfile. you have to make sure key doesnt work anywhere else, after i have put my email in.

[arsmori]

Nothing like silent updates to thwart crack/keygen users.
Not that I know anything about that, just saying...

[rayvt]

If you want to do some sort of two-stage security key, just use Diffie-Hellman. It's a simple protocol, and the data exchanges could be done via email.

Or maybe have the openly-available downloadable DVD-RB file a password protected zip or rar file, and legit users get a key which contains the password.

Thing is, if the pro version of RB is downloadable, it WILL be cracked in short order. You can take that to the bank. The only way this won't happen is if the dl'able file is encrypted with a strong algorithm--and that pretty much means a password protected archive.

You'd still have the problem of a legit user leaking his key, but that's the same problem that already exists, so it wouldn't be any worse than it is now. But it would solve your download bandwidth problem. And if the password leaked out, you could change the password on the archive and plug the leak immediately.


Hmmmm, this is getting interesting (can you tell I'm a software engineer?) How about something like this:
* Put the new version (password protected zip) on a well-known public server.
* Email the notice and personal key to all VIP users.
* Users dl the zip, and execute a "get my key" program that's in the zip.
* This program takes as input the user's key from the email, and uses it in the 1st step of a D-H key exchange. It generates a text string which is the D-H data.
* This data is emailed to you (or somewhere under your control) and automatically goes to the D-H program. The output of this is the D-H agreed-on key, which is used to send the zip password to the VIP user.
* VIP user then uses that password to get RB executable from the zip file.

Of course, the email steps could be a web-based thing, too. I'm assuming that you already run a server. If so, it's even easier and quicker than emailing the stuff.

Sounds complex, but it's really not. We did a very similar thing a few years ago at my work, in a data-radio Public Safety system. If you want to persue something like this, I'd be glad to code it up for you.

[jdobbs]

Well, whatever I do with the key file it will have to change. The e-mail feedback from the non-techies hasn't been good at all. It also seems that for some reason links ending in ".au.key" are somehow losing the ".key" and the browser is trying to play the file as audio... so if anybody wastes their time cracking this one it won't be good for long...

[ScooterMyth]

@rayvt
You have some very good ideas about implementing security. I agree that the PRO version of the program should not be available for anonymous download. This in the end is probably the most secure. It's not foolproof but it's like locks on a door, it keeps the honest people honest! ;)
@jdobbs
Great work on this program. I look forward to the "finished" version as the beta is doing a great job now.

[Edsel]

My thoughts:

Ditch the .key extension. That's a predefined extension, only confusion results from doing so. You wouldn't choose .mp3 if it wasn't a music file, etc. Something like xxxxx-key.bin, would be better.

Better yet, if you actually store the key in the registry, then a .key file would be perfect, and double clicking would have been fine to install it. This is especially true for non-techies, copying and pasting is a much more difficult operation than launching.

I really wouldn't spend a lot of time developing complicated protections. They don't take any longer to crack than simple ones, all it does is waste your time. And as you've seen, adding protection starts costing you customer support time as well.

You release new versions often enough that it functionally works as protection. Just make it so each version or two requires a new key.

[p200002]

Originally posted by Edsel
My thoughts:

Ditch the .key extension. That's a predefined extension, only confusion results from doing so. You wouldn't choose .mp3 if it wasn't a music file, etc. Something like xxxxx-key.bin, would be better.

Better yet, if you actually store the key in the registry, then a .key file would be perfect, and double clicking would have been fine to install it. This is especially true for non-techies, copying and pasting is a much more difficult operation than launching.

I really wouldn't spend a lot of time developing complicated protections. They don't take any longer to crack than simple ones, all it does is waste your time. And as you've seen, adding protection starts costing you customer support time as well.

You release new versions often enough that it functionally works as protection. Just make it so each version or two requires a new key.

Even bin is confusing since there are bin/cue for image burning.:D

[jdobbs]

I'm thinking "rbk" for "rebuilder key"

[ozzii]

The key with rbk is a good think.
And why not to host your VIP version on a free server (like mytempdir.com). Like that you don't use your bandwidth and you can send the link just for the VIP members ;)

[TECK]

1568-2252-0872-5381.rbk

The above code key will give out the owner identity to developer.
License ID: 00000001
Username: teck@email.com

If I put this on the Internet, I will get instantly banned from future upgrades.
The dev should also consider a 'callhome' feature, just to make his life easy. :)

[MCFish]

Originally posted by Edsel
I really wouldn't spend a lot of time developing complicated protections. They don't take any longer to crack than simple ones, all it does is waste your time.

not entirely true. just look at Starforce. not that he should make a cd protection :), but its a better protection and harder to crack.

[ozzii]

Originally posted by MCFish
not entirely true. just look at Starforce. not that he should make a cd protection :), but its a better protection and harder to crack.

And look like the app DVDRemake Pro how is really hard to crack.

[Walxer]

I code some apps in Visual C++ and I have same problems than jdobbs; after many interesting methods used [keys with xxxx number of bytes,customized encryption systems, password +encryption + key,etc...], I have got a very easy-strong method to protect my registered users from execution or distribution of my apps around;
Simply do an easy HARDWARE-dependant little encryption algorithm,the most easy possible,do some mathematical logical calculation,and put in intelligent ways the verification,the error messages,and everything...at the end encrypt your exe,compress,do some CRC control and make it difficult to debug :D
You will see that if you won't be in front of an expert hacker,your app will be very difficult cracked ;)
If you like,I can explain by pm or I can also sendi my pieces of sources about protection by email...I think is the MINIMUM that I can do,after you MAGNIFICENT piece of art of software :D

:cool:

[buzzqw]

hardware key isn't a good thing

I have a license, so i can install in 1 computer or in all my computer ?

I don't want a microsoft like license.

BHH

[Yusaku]

I would suggest following edsel's advice - leave the extension to .key (or .reg) and make it into real registry file, that way you get an intuitive "installer" of the keyfile for free. It is not a big difference to read few bytes from file than from predefined place in registry and it would IMO decrease support costs (=emails to answer).

And implementing small parser to read the data directly from the registry file (so that the current way works and users who learned it this way can continue to do so) is simple as well - just a BASE64 decoder will do it.

[maksa]

Jdobbs,
look @ Dimad's (DVR ReMake) way of protection. Every user has an account and it is enabled for certain program or version. When user wants to download program must enter hardware number relataed to his/hers own computer. After that he/she gets personalized version of the program that works only on that machine. If you want to download it on different machine, need to enter new hardware number. It is easy to track it. If user had downloaded program on 1 to, say 5 machines (up to you) it is OK. But if the program is downloaded from the same account more than some number, you disable this account. This way, if the account is hacked without user knowledge, illegal distribution won't be high and copies of the program only work on prticular machine. And user can get different acount (some penalty may apply) or be banned for deliberate releasal - up to you to decide.
Of course, even this could be hacked, but than again, what can be NOT (CSS? :D ), 128-bit encription, Enigma (WWII) and so...

By the way, key looks fine, but it is easy to hack, because it is transfered as file, while hardware number is machine dependent.

Just my 2c

Regards,
Maksa

[Walxer]

Originally posted by maksa
Jdobbs,
look @ Dimad's (DVR ReMake) way of protection. Every user has an account and it is enabled for certain program or version. When user wants to download program must enter hardware number relataed to his/hers own computer. After that he/she gets personalized version of the program that works only on that machine. If you want to download it on different machine, need to enter new hardware number. It is easy to track it. If user had downloaded program on 1 to, say 5 machines (up to you) it is OK. But if the program is downloaded from the same account more than some number, you disable this account. This way, if the account is hacked without user knowledge, illegal distribution won't be high and copies of the program only work on prticular machine. And user can get different acount (some penalty may apply) or be banned for deliberate releasal - up to you to decide.
Of course, even this could be hacked, but than again, what can be NOT (CSS? :D ), 128-bit encription, Enigma (WWII) and so...

By the way, key looks fine, but it is easy to hack, because it is transfered as file, while hardware number is machine dependent.

Just my 2c

Regards,
Maksa
I totally quote this guy.
Is what i said before,but my way is so so so much simple [as DVD-RB was born] ;)
Maybe is better for the moment not to make the whole engine so heavy :D

:cool:

[aaron10]

I know the Remake method has its proponents, but it did raise a lot of anguish a year or so ago when DVD95Copy went that route. Although I had no dog in the hunt, many people shunned DVD95Copy because of this protection scheme. Two of the biggest (and probably somewhat logical) argruments against it were hotly belabored for several days: (1) What if the company disappears, you won't be able to use the program on a new machine because there's no one there to issue a version tailored to it. (2) How critically does the protection scheme look at computer architecture? That is, how much and what can I change before the program decides it's not on the correct machine?

I suspect Jdobbs will remember those debates.

[TECK]

aaron10, I totally agree with you.
I hope jdobbs will not go down this ugly road... What if your server is down for a day?
I have few programs that I had to reactivate them, because I changed my HD. I waited a week until my new keys were provided. I was not happy at all, regreted that I purchased them and removed them from my upgrades list.

[Video Dude]

Whatever protection jdobbs decides on, it should be kept secret. The current key system is good. It is not intrusive.

No matter the protection, the software should still be fully functional if support for the program is ended. If "activation on install" aka "call home before install" programs are discontinued, those who paid money for the program would be out of luck if they needed to install.

[Dimad]

If you remember, we've already discussed it some time ago. As was said, if you think system implemented at DimadSoft.com for DvdReMake (Pro) can be of any interest to you - just let me know, I'll be glad to share info/code with you.

Even if you choose not to go with computer id related protection it may be wise to imprint info about user into program itself during download so that you will know for sure who leeked the program (if it happens).

[StinkiePhish]

To answer the parent topic: for me, the key file was fine, but I can see how other people would have problems.

I hate to be the pessimist of the group, but whatever protection is finally decided upon, it will get cracked. It's inevitable.

There are some great ideas that I've read in this post and it makes me feel good to see how many smart minds are coming together for *gasp* copy protection.

Good luck with this, and thanks for making an amazing piece of software that I will continue to donate towards.

[Amir]

@Dimad

With the greatest of respect... There is no point investing time in such schemes. I've seen in my travels non-machine locked versions of remake pro etc.. they hold no interest to me as I'm a major fan of pgcedit.

As for finger printing the files, again a complete waste of developer time. You only need to see the situation with IDA Pro and the constant releases..another example would be the XDK releases, finger prints removed.

The problem is the hackers have teams of people waiting to remove your security, if only for the Kudos. I truly feel for you as a developer (I am one too) which is why i resist and use pgcedit + ifoedit (out of principal). I do however feel strongly about time spent on "protections" when countless hours are spent on them. Only to see them beat in hours (sometimes less).

I'd hope there are enough honest people out there to pay you for your hardwork and by all means implement what you feel you need. Just no nasty calling home type protections. A perfect example of such a poor protection that HURT customers is the recent horrible episode of outage for NewsLeecher when the primary domain on the website went down and countless users were left high and dry. The ones using "fixed" .xexs were able to use the app unimpeeded (hows that for a slap in the face for paying customers).

Here you can read how the developer tries to explain what happened, IMHO too little too late, phone home calls no working = non-working s/w = angry customers.

http://www.zeropaid.com/bbs/showthread.php?t=27251

Luckily I use BNR2 as IMHO its faster and free...

Just wanted to play the devils advocate and show the other side of things when such great ideas end up hurting the paying customers..

[arsmori]

There are some great ideas that I've read in this post and it makes me feel good to see how many smart minds are coming together for *gasp* copy protection.
Slightly hypocritical, considering these are the same folks who populate slashdot and condemn large corporations in a single nod for that very same behavior. Suddenly, Orwellian tactics like machine ID and private tagging is AOK when one greed enter the equation ;)

[Dimad]

The problem is the hackers have teams of people waiting to remove your security, if only for the Kudos. I truly feel for you as a developer (I am one too) which is why i resist and use pgcedit + ifoedit (out of principal). I do however feel strongly about time spent on "protections" when countless hours are spent on them. Only to see them beat in hours (sometimes less).

That is right. With tools available nowdays it is fairly easy to hack any protection. From my little experience in this subj any publicly available fully functional program will be cracked within days (if it is of interest to anyone to crack). But I don't think it is completely useless to try and do something about it.



There is no point investing time in such schemes. I've seen in my travels non-machine locked versions of remake pro etc..

Let me not agree with you on this. During the life of DvdReMake Pro v2 (about a year, now v3 is released) there were about 5 leeked versions I'm aware of. In all but one there were attempts to remove the info about original owner (actually none succseeded, all responsible accounts were closed). Only one of the "non-machine locked versions" works correctly. Looks good to me.

Of course it took some time to implement it. And I felt strongly that it is a waste of time and I would rather spend it working on the program functionality. But now I think it was worth the efforts. I can compare to v1 which did not have any protection (apart from the fact that it was only awailable for download to registered users). When v1 became public I could clearly see in logs how much it affected people desire to get registered version.

Just my 2c. ;)

[Jimroc]

If I show you how I bypassed the keycheck, maybe you can make the program more secure.
Jdobbs, lemme know if you'd like to have a look.

PS. I will of course keep this to myself if you're not interested.

[rayvt]

My son in college informs me that with a decent debugger at hand, he can (should he so choose) crack just about any program in half an hour. Maybe 1 or 2 hours for a difficult one. Any time spend making the program protected is largely wasted effort----it's just too easy to work around.

I'm still of the opinion that the best/simplest thing is to have a publicly downloadable program encrypted, and distribute the decryption key to only valid users. Part of the "key" would be user-id branding information (user name, etc.).Use a different key for each version. Also in the distribution zip file would be a program which would decrypt the executable and brand it with the user-id. There are plenty of simple, free encrypt/decrypt programs available, to do a rock-solid crypto algorithm----AES, blowfish, RC4, triple-DES, etc.

[p200002]

DVDRemake Pro has been cracked twice in the past 12-month. IMHO, none of the protected program is not hackable. The current method of distribution is not bad. We really shall spend time on how o improve the program than discussing various approaches of software protection, otherwise what's the difference between us and MPAA?

[ShadowKnight]

I have to ditifully disagree with those who say it is a waste of time to protect the software. The reality is that software will be pirated, yes, no one will argue that... but if you make it harder on your average person, then you will prevent some piracy.

There is no elegant solution, and perhaps the best way is to fingerprint the software. Perhaps you could complicate the pirates job by making the program code itself reliant on the copy protection to function properly. The only think I know for sure is that the software will have to find a way to overcome the piracy aspect.

The biggest issue I see, is that everything from CCE to Procoder can be pirated and cracked, and DVD-RB will not be an exception to that. But that doesn't mean you cant combat the piracy to slow it down and add trip wires to mess with the ecodes on cracked versions.. throw out some error codes... LOL have some fun.. How about, error code $$$ you did not pay for this version, your 6 hour encode was now a waste of time, please register your version of DVD-RB-Pro :p

Just remember whatever happens, that many of us do respect what you have done for us jdobbs, and will gladly pay what we can afford to contribute to compensate you for all the time and money you saved us.

Perhaps the best anti-piracy you have is marketing to peoples' reasoning.
"By Backing up just one DVD from your collection, you can save yourself $20, in replacement costs of a DVD. And by spending that $20 on this program, you can rest assured that you will have the most stable software to help you protect every DVD in your collection."
"One man gave up years of his life in persuit of protecting DVD collections around the world, and all you have to give is the price of a single DVD that he's saved you from damaging."

I dunno; I better get to bed... good to see everyone here, I've been busy lately... but still appreciative of what your doing Jdobbs. You deserve to be repayed and more for all your hard work!

[Numer0bis]

WEll unitl now I only saw one pro version floating around on piratebay and is still a old one. The Problem will be that the crackers have to crack every version again, so some copy protection will help, but won't stop piracy

[jdobbs]

Ok, thanks for all the inputs...

I'm not a protection nut... I know nothing is perfect. That isn't the point here. A determined person could crack any key given enough time and effort. The purpose of this thread was to make sure that the key isn't "burdensome"... not to debate keys.

While it isn't perfect, it just might help me from working for nothing. The most important thing is that whatever method is used it needs to be non-intrusive -- I don't want anyone to get "put-off" because it is a pain-in-the-ass.

[Edsel]

I have to ditifully disagree with those who say it is a waste of time to protect the software. The reality is that software will be pirated, yes, no one will argue that... but if you make it harder on your average person, then you will prevent some piracy.

But that doesn't really address the issue of "waste of time". By wasting time, we're talking about the benefits received vs the time invested.

Sure, he can spend 100 hours developing a copy protection scheme, dozens more hours debugging it, countless hours in tech support trying to understand why the protection is failing for legitimate customers, then repeat the entire cycle spending dozens more hours updating the protection when he discovers it's been cracked in the first week, and "some" piracy will be prevented.

But, those hundreds of hours are hours not spent on adding new features, improving old ones, etc.

And at the end of all that work (if it ever ends, since each "side" keeps coming up with new schemes to defeat the other's last move), he'll have *NO IDEA* how many pirated copies difference it made. One? Ten? A thousand? How many users will contact him and say "Gosh, I was going to pirate this, but I couldn't manage it, so I bought the program instead"? A handful at best.

The current key system along with blacklisting will work fine to discourage any casual pirating. If the product is good and reasonably priced, and RB is, people will buy it.

[ShadowKnight]

well, the point here is that without any protection, pirating will be more widespread.

I think the current system will work fine, but that perhaps dimads system should be adopted in order to aid in fingerprinting so to speak. But I dont know if that would be considered to burdensome for some people.

I had no problems with the current system, but I also think it would be relatively easy to crack it and not have any idea who did it. But since we dont need to be debating this here, lets just let it be what it is for now.

The key works, it was easy to install, just drag and drop, and no issues at all from it.

[rayvt]

As a one-time pretty successful shareware author, I would say that the best way to "protect" your software is----make it cheap. People would pay me $15, but wouldn't have paid $25. Also, (remember, this was long before paypal) foreigners had a hard time sending me American money. I have a check denominate in US dollars ($25 to be exact) in a frame on my office wall. The German bank it is written on does not have a Federal Reserve Board routing number, and banks here charged a $30 fee to cash it.

I made one of my sharewares to be "postcard-ware". The fee was "if you like my program, send me a pretty picture postcard." I got THOUSANDS of postcards from all over the world--probably 1/3rd of them from outside the US, including Japan, Taiwan, S. Korea, and Beloruss. I would have *never* gotten cash money from outside the US, and would likely have received less than $100 if I had charged even as little as $5.

[casonbang]

I can't find any way to download a current installer and current keyfile. I downloaded the installer from the last email but forgot to save the keyfile. Now I can't get any versions that I have saved to work with the keyfile that I have saved (and no idea what version it is).

So I guess my suggestion is some way for us registered users to download DVD-RB and the keyfile again. I registered with the site and checked all of the related DVD-RB sites and couldn't find any way. And the links from an old email I found no longer work so I can't even use that. :-\

[jdobbs]

The key file is unique to each version. I'd suggest you just throw older versions away -- if there weren't improvements and fixes there would be no reason for another version.

If you wanted to step back one version, however, the keyfile is always kept online for the current version and one prior. Just don't delete the notification e-mail. The installer and keyfile links that are in the same notification work together.

The keyfile mechanism is changing for v1.05.

[ron spencer]

will it change so that it is machine dependent...i hope not

[Rockas]

will it change so that it is machine dependent...i hope not
Why not?

[ron spencer]

it is a pain...but that is my humble opinion only....I steer clear of stuff I cannot use if I build a new machine, or internet is down, etc. Is just a pain, while I do believe in IP management I think this product activation, machine dependent stuff is aweful.

He has said in other posts that the cracked versions he has found have not worked, so I hope there is no change; I do not think it will be good for sales.

Again just my 2 cents. I think the current system is fine.

[blutach]

Why not?For those of us that run our DVDRB copies on 2 machines. :) Nevertheless, progs such as DVDRMP seems to get around this by giving you up to 5 machine dependant codes (you actually register the PC on dimad's site) - I, for one, would be happy with that approach.

I think the current mechanism works too - however, if it needs strengthening to avoid people pirating jdobbs's work, then strengthen it by all means.

Regards

[casonbang]

The key file is unique to each version. I'd suggest you just throw older versions away -- if there weren't improvements and fixes there would be no reason for another version.
...
The keyfile mechanism is changing for v1.05.

I guess saving previous versions is a habit I learned from the early DVD-RB beta testing days. ;)

[Carpo]

it would be best to send an email to dvd-rb(at)dvd-rb(dot)com as stated in the email :helpful:

[jdobbs]

If you want to keep a working copy of old versions for reuse, just throw the "c:\program files\dvd-rb pro" directory into zip file and save it before running the installer. You could also create a subdirectory under that one and just do a copy and paste. That way if you wanted to run it, all you'd need to do is point a shortcut to that executable.

But about the only thing thats good for is comparing to see if a bug was introduced in the new version. Otherwise its always better to use the updated code.

[dragongodz]

For those of us that run our DVDRB copies on 2 machines. Nevertheless, progs such as DVDRMP seems to get around this by giving you up to 5 machine dependant codes (you actually register the PC on dimad's site) - I, for one, would be happy with that approach.
if you mean the pc being registered has to be coneccted to the net aswell then thats also a major pain.
i have a second pc that will eventually be used for encoding etc and it doesnt and never will be connected to the net. so any registration that requires that will make using the second pc impossible.
also if there is any connection problems then this type of registration can fail aswell. i mentioned some time ago how i can no longer download the key as normal but have to go through a proxy. i even gave jdobbs my isp etc and he couldnt see why it wouldnt connect as its not being specifically blocked. still happens though.

also being locked to your hardware is a major pain if you do lots of upgrading. whenever i upgrade something in my main pc the old part goes to the second pc, so they both change. also the second pc gets its own upgrades if i find something xheap at the computer market or second hand(a copuple of pc places here sell second hand parts). windows xp, which is only on my main pc, is already a major pain in the @$$ for this so i personally wouldnt like it.

just my humble thoughts on the matter anyway.

[ron spencer]

I also think that by making machine dependent it is bad business. Who reads licensing arrangements anyways? Most people do not read the parts that say you need another key when you add RAM..so when this happens and the key is unavailable people freak and go the "dark route". I have read on other boards that when Adobe had machine dependent photoshop that alot of pros simply downloaded the keygen to protect their pruchase...and many needed it on shoots when PS would just crap out and require a new activation. Now DVD Rebuilder does not cost alot and you likely would never be offsite, but I wonder just how many of the keygens for PS made it from the pros to their friends? I think this would happen with DVD Rebuilder.
Downloading your own key is nice now.

In any case, just how much of a problem is piracy with DVD Rebuilder anyway? If not then why change anything?

[jptheripper]

my opinion

do whatever you need to to satisfy your feelings that the software is reasonably secure from being stolen/cracked

hell have the key file write my email into the properties in the ifo file. If you are only doing legal backups, it doesnt matter

as for connecting to the net or hardware, net is a bit annoying, hardware is not. If you get a new motherboard, request a new key. Its not that hard, how often do you change mb's anyway, once every couple years?

Hell you could hardware key it (on parallel or usb port) for all i care, but that would drive the price up.

If ppl dont like how you key it, the best thing about this free country is, they are free to choose a different comparable software (of which there are none :)

my opinion

[ron spencer]

of course they are free....but once annoyance gets built in then most will have no issue in ripping it off. I think he should protect his product, but there is a fine line between protecting and causing others grief which affects your bottom line; just ask Adobe.

But I ask again, is piracy of this program a problem?

[jptheripper]

it absolutely is

i have seen repackaged releases of it (i wont say where)

that and with a small program with limited release, every penny deserves to go to the author

[Video Dude]

if you mean the pc being registered has to be coneccted to the net aswell then thats also a major pain.
i have a second pc that will eventually be used for encoding etc and it doesnt and never will be connected to the net. so any registration that requires that will make using the second pc impossible.
I hope this is not the case. I also do all my video stuff on a dedicated PC without a network card, so it would be impossible for me to connect to the internet with that computer.

[jdobbs]

I never realized how bad piracy kills a program before I started work on DVD Rebuilder. It happened on several of the prior versions -- even the freeware versions have been released with "cracks" (go figure)...

Every time my donations pretty much stopped.

If anything kills DVD Rebuilder or independent software development in general -- it will be piracy.

[jdobbs]

BTW. I'd never come up with a keying scheme that required your computer to be connected to run -- not would I create phone-home software.

The key concept I'm working on would require a connection to the internet just to get the key -- just like now. That key could then be transferred to the non-connected computer. It also allows for more than one key for each registered address. I use it on more than one computer, so why would I expect someone else to.

[ron spencer]

well I was under the impression that these repacks did not work (from posts on this forum). But simply put a crack is a crack, it may or may not work.

I do not mind having to get my key from the net, but I would like to be able to take it, copy it, and transfer it where ever I choose (I only use one instance anyway). It is just my expectation of any software that I purchase to provide this immediate flexibility. If this is the case for the new scheme great!!!!

But if the keys are tied to the machine then I think it gives the crackers more impeteus to crack the program...more of a challenge. Then when an end user tries to use it later they say "huh" getted angry, and go the crack route, or even worse tell everyone they know NOT to use that program.

It is tough for developers...and yes my post is a bit selfish as I want flexibility, that I admit to. But I can only provide my opinion; that is all.

[jdobbs]

As is always the case, in the past some of the cracks worked, some have not. Some of my favorites are the ones that show a "This software has been cracked" message in the middle of the picture on random chapters after you've gone through 2 hours of encoding.

If someone wants to use Rebuilder for free -- they should download the freeware version. That's why its there.

[Carpo]

the process it clean and easy (when u use it right) :devil:

[ron spencer]

I see the new version V1.05 requires internet access for key and is machine dependent...is a pity I think.

[aaron10]

@ron spencer

Either you're misreading/misinterpreting or I'm misreading/misinterpreting. I think the second post on this page says nearly the opposite of what you're intimating. Moreover, you always needed internet access to get the key, so nothing has changed there.

[SpazzHH]

I see the new version V1.05 requires internet access for key

That's no different than the older versions


and is machine dependent...is a pity I think.

Even though jdobbs is doing his best it seems to avoid total clarity on the issue, all he has said so far is that the keys are tied to the registered address in some way, so let's give it at least a chance before panicking. I'm sure He's doing as little as he feels he must in order to protect his investment. ;)

[ron spencer]

actually:

"The downloaded key is personalized to your unique computer via
a computed "System ID" and your registered e-mail address. It
will not work on other computers. If you need to run DVD-RB on
other computers for your personal use, you must use the Reg-RB
utility (included) to generate a unique system id and key for
other system(s). "

"Your registered e-mail address is limited to a total of five (5)
unique system IDs."



Sorry to see this...it is a shame, especially for those with one system who change alot of stuff all the time for fun as a hobby. This will create issues and will double the efforts for the cracker folks.

Oh well...I am not pleased, but that is my opinion only.

I do not mind downloading a key (I admit I was not clear on this)...but it should work on any machine I have without having to get another key. It seems to me he has changed the licensing schema under us. This is like DVDRemake now.

Pity....

[jdobbs]

Sorry. I'd suggest you send a nastygram to a hacker...

I'd also suggest you wait until you have a problem before you complain about it. You don't know what comprises the System ID or whether it will ever change yet.

[ron spencer]

As I said it is my opinion only...and I resent the hacker reference.

Simple fact is that I cannot port this prog to my cottage computer without bringing it home, getting on to internet here, and getting my key, which is nonsense.

Programs like this really rely on word of mouth, which I have been doing diligently since V1. Now I fully expect that if anyone took me up on my advice and bought it that I will be hearing from them. They will also hear of your hacker reference.

I agree that you need to protect your IP, but this way treats us all like kids who will give away oue keys, and your previous posts in this thread never hinted at this.

You had a great idea with wrecking the video on hacked verisons. Nothing better than wasting an all night encode to get you to buy it.

Now:

how about you specifically tell us what will change the System ID. I reinstall 3-5 times per year, add ram a bunch of times, change hard drives all the time...so what will?

You can choose to do whatever you want with your proggy, but I doubt it will have the allure it once did. It certainly does not for me.

But as I said before, this is just my opinion; sorry.

[jptheripper]

yeah no kidding.. i read the "but it should work on any machine I have without having to get another key." statement as "i would like to give it to all my friends with only having to pay for it once" otherwise the statement is silly. Are you really gonna run rb on more than 5 machines? if so, you should buy more than one copy.

[ron spencer]

you assume that I am giving away the program then?

[jdobbs]

Let's drop this. It has to be done... or I shut the program down. Simple as that. I can't go on losing money forever, I'm hoping at some point to at least break even.

[ron spencer]

then that is fine...if you have issues on quitting the program/losing money then state them, but don't say that I should go see a hacker to "fix" your prog; what is a prospective purchaser going to think if they are on the fence given the licensing scheme and sees your comment? I do not want to see any developer go under, but I should be able to express an honest opinion about what I feel is a wrong policy.

If you were losing money then say that...don't beat around the bush.

As I said many posts before this is my opinion...trash it if you want but don't trash me.


But I still have to ask, what will change the system ID?

[dragongodz]

the process it clean and easy (when u use it right)
sorry but nice in theory but not true for everyone in practise. the new system in 1.05 can not get the key for me just as i could not download the key without using a proxy for older versions. this only changed when my isp was bought by a larger one(3rd biggest in Australia). i am working with jdobbs to try and see exactly why its not connecting but until thats worked out jdobbs would have to personally email me keys.
having to have a pc connected to the net to GET a key is not a big deal since, as others have said, you have always had to be connected to get a key. my only concerns with this was how this could fail and needing to have any pc that you wished to use DVD-RB with needed to be connected. since jdobbs has said
That key could then be transferred to the non-connected computer
the second part will not be a concern.

as for connecting to the net or hardware, net is a bit annoying, hardware is not. If you get a new motherboard, request a new key. Its not that hard, how often do you change mb's anyway, once every couple years?
actually for me the hardware i.d. is more the pain. if it was just the motherboard then ye thats updated the least so not so bad but other hardware, such as cpu etc can get updated more often.
actually for motherboards AMD seem to want people to keep upgrading aswell. i was looking at getting a socket 939 board since there are some cheap ones now but have put that on hold since i read about them changing sockets again early next year to socket M2. hopefully they will stick with that for a while. ;)

If ppl dont like how you key it, the best thing about this free country is, they are free to choose a different comparable software (of which there are none
ye and people are free to raise reasonable concerns without having a smart@rse remark like that. oh and we live in a world not a country incase you didnt notice. :devil:

[on30trainman]

jdobbs,
My only comment on the new keying scheme is that it would have helped a dummy like me (an older guy with a diminishing mental capacity), who has his DVD-RB on a non-internet connected machine, to have put a note in the e-mail to READ THE HELP FILEin the Key File Registration screen.
I know that statement is in the Rebuilder.txt file but well into it. I didn't see it until I spent some time trying to get RB to work and was getting quite frustrated. The HELP file tells it all.
Just my two cents worth.

Steve W.

[SpazzHH]

I wouldn't assume that. Then again, when I read jdobbs message, I took it to mean, send a nastygram to a hacker because they are the ones to blame for us all having to go through all of this mess. I sure am sorry you took it as a personal attack.

[dragongodz]

wow, last bunch of posts happened while i was typing mine.

maybe this is all going on beyond reasonable concerns. i think jdobbs knows peoples worries now anyway so lets just all drop it for now and see how things go instead of starting to accuse people of things etc.

[jdobbs]

then that is fine...if you have issues on quitting the program/losing money then state them, but don't say that I should go see a hacker to "fix" your prog; what is a prospective purchaser going to think if they are on the fence given the licensing scheme and sees your comment? I do not want to see any developer go under, but I should be able to express an honest opinion about what I feel is a wrong policy.

If you were losing money then say that...don't beat around the bush.

As I said many posts before this is my opinion...trash it if you want but don't trash me.


But I still have to ask, what will change the system ID?That's not what I said.... I said the complaint should go to the guys who are forcing this... not me.

[ron spencer]

allright then, but that is how I took it....fine; I don't really care now

But you still need to articulate under what conditions the system ID will change. You really do for the tinker-types. I think this is a must.

[jdobbs]

I'd like to add one more note to this before this thread (hopefully) goes away.

In addition to supporting a more secure protection, this mechanism was created to simplify the key process. So far the feedback I've gotten is overwealmingly positive (like a hundred to one). I also ran it through testing on a group of early beta testers before releasing it -- and those comments supported it. People like this a lot better than the old way of having to download a key separately. But unfortunately you can't please everyone -- so I'm aiming for the 99%.

I listen to my customers...

[jdobbs]

allright then, but that is how I took it....fine; I don't really care now

But you still need to articulate under what conditions the system ID will change. You really do for the tinker-types. I think this is a must. Please... you know the answer to that, and you also know why.

[ron spencer]

No I do not know why, or why I would know. Adobe feels free to tell you:

"What is Reactivation and why is it needed?
Photoshop CS2 activation is designed to be tolerable of most changes to your computer's configuration. On a PC changes such as: the graphics card, sound card, CD/DVD ROM drives, memory, CPU and motherboard should not require reactivation. However, very occasionally the License Manager may lose synchronisation with the authorisation code that was written to part of your hard disk when you activated Photoshop. In this event you will be presented with the alert dialog shown in Figure 4 below. This alert is informing you that Photoshop needs to be reactivated before you can continue to use it. On a Mac activation is tied to the unique IP address built into the computer by Apple when it was manufactured. This means that the Mac activation loosing synchronisation is is very unlikely."

Just a simple question...from a simple google search.

[jdobbs]

This has gone beyond reasonable conversation. I'm no longer participating.

Cheers.

[ron spencer]

???? Suit yourself....just thought it was a reasonable question...guess not.

C'ya

[spyhawk]

IMHO, use of System ID is just similar to that of DvdReMake. I don't see any problem with it. Even though the limit is 5 downloads, just ask yourself, do you really use RB in all 5 systems? Even if you change/upgrade hardware, the probably is that you're not going to do it often. You can then check if the System ID has changed or not. If it does, just get a new key. It shouldn't be a problem. Besides, new version always comes out. Just my 2 cents. :)

@jdobbs,
I get this critical error message that reg-rb.exe could not execute when I go to Help -> Download Key File. Is this on purpose? Both the reg-rb.exe and the new key are already in the RB folder..

[Dimad]

IMHO, use of System ID is just similar to that of DvdReMake. I don't see any problem with it. Even though the limit is 5 downloads...
Sorry to jump in, but this incorrect statement been done several times here. Just to set it right. "Magic number" 5 is not a limit of downloads - it is just the ammount of previously used Computer IDs stored on site for particular registration. When download for 6+ is requested it will "push off" older saved IDs.

Again, sorry for OT.

[blutach]

This is jdobbs software, not joe smith's or bill bloggs's. jdobbs will decide how to implement the means to protect HIS work.

I, for one, as mentioned earlier, support this 100% (as do, I trust, the vast majority of DVDRB users). Let's face it - the pro version hit the illegal download "market" within days. Is that what anyone wants for this work? Do we want jdobbs to toss it all in and say "I can't win" because of software piracy? Of course not! So to any detractors, I say, let's support jdobbs.

Whatever small imposition is required, so be it.

BTW: I also support Dimad's system, which serves users very well - you can even "pre-register" your machines (5 of them) before new versions come out (that takes account of changes to major hardware).

Regards

[Rippraff]

Sorry. I'd suggest you send a nastygram to a hacker...
IMHO this doesn't sound very nice and can easily be misinterpreted. Maybe both sides have to sleep on it and calm down? Just my two cents.

Back to topic:
For all the ones who are running RB on a non-internet connected pc, there might be another possibility. Is it possible to copy just the Reg_RB to the unconnected, write down SI-Nr and run "Get Key file" with the new number on the connected machine? There is the possibility to change System Identifier value manually but I'm not sure if it works?
I can't test it because I do have only one pc to work with RB. My old notebook (PIII 600MHz) is far to slow ;).

Cu Rippraff

[casonbang]

I believe jdobbs has now collected a variety of opinions on the matter. He has listened to the feedback and made his decision, at least regarding the next version.

There is nothing left to discuss. Perhaps this topic should be closed?

[jdobbs]

IMHO this doesn't sound very nice and can easily be misinterpreted. Maybe both sides have to sleep on it and calm down? Just my two cents.

Back to topic:
For all the ones who are running RB on a non-internet connected pc, there might be another possibility. Is it possible to copy just the Reg_RB to the unconnected, write down SI-Nr and run "Get Key file" with the new number on the connected machine? There is the possibility to change System Identifier value manually but I'm not sure if it works?
I can't test it because I do have only one pc to work with RB. My old notebook (PIII 600MHz) is far to slow ;).

Cu Rippraff I guess everyone doesn't know what a "nastygram" is... its an e-mail telling someone you don't like something. I guess I just don't understand how it could be misinterpreted to mean something else???

[ron spencer]

yep....he can enter any scheme he wants, which in the end is ok. Again it was just my opinion.

BTW here is what I got by googling for nastygram

"1. A protocol packet or item of email (the latter is also called a letterbomb) that takes advantage of misfeatures or security holes on the target system to do untoward things. "

BTW is there a changlog for 1.05? Bug fixes?

[ozzii]

BTW is there a changlog for 1.05? Bug fixes?

Like always, YES. Read the rebuilder.txt

P.S. For me, no prob with this new "key procedure" ;)

[Rippraff]

I guess everyone doesn't know what a "nastygram" is...
You're right. ;)
What about my topic related question?

BTW is there a changlog for 1.05? Bug fixes?
Take a look at Rebuilder.txt or wait until jdobbs updates the sticky. :)

Cu Rippraff

[skipper152]

Well, the download of the key file worked fine at work on my work machine (I just downloaded the new 1.05 pro).

But if what I am reading means that I cannot transfer this key to another machine, then DVDRB will really be useless to me. I do my encoding on a machine at home that has no connection to the internet, hence no keyfile.

Thanks for the great work. And I do hope for everyone else jdobbs can continue the work.

Time to start looking around at other programs.

[jdobbs]

You can run it at home fine. But you need to know the System ID for that computer so a key can be generated. From work you can run REG-RB.EXE and enter the ID for your home computer along with your registered e-mail address and it will create a key that you can take home. You could also send an e-mail to dvd-rb@dvd-rb.com that includes the System ID and I will send it to you.

The internet connection requirement is no different than it was before when you had to download the key.

I'm trying to make things simpler, not harder...

[Rippraff]

I'm trying to make things simpler, not harder...
Sounds quite simple and it works in the same way as I've posted above. (http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?p=751578#post751578) :)

Cu Rippraff

[skipper152]

Its an extra step or two, but if this new way helps to protect the program, its a minor inconvenience for me.
At first, it seemed the machine I was going to encode on had to be connected to the net to get the key file. Guess not! I need to read more carefully.

Thanks for clearing up my misunderstanding! I'll give it a try tonight when I get home.

[feedback]

But you still need to articulate under what conditions the system ID will change. You really do for the tinker-types. I think this is a must.
It is not a must it is a desire and it is a desire that is not going to be fulfilled so get over it. A must is food, clothing and shelter. BTW, You are the only one in this thread that has repeatedly asked for this information.

I use another program, STOIK Video Converter, from time to time that uses a Hardware fingerprint and it is no big deal.

DVD Rebuilder is jdobbs baby and as such he can and will do what he wants with it so deal with it.

People can threaten to go use some other program but as DVD-RB has no competition in it's ease of use I think those are hollow threats.

So, everyone needs to take a chill pill and let the jdobbs get back to work on Rebuilder instead of having to reply to a minority of malcontents in this thread.

Regards,:)

[Rockas]

Ok... I'll leave my 5 cents too :)

I think that every programmer has the right to protect his work and I really think that as a user I also want that evry program I buy is protected, why?
I simply don't like the feeling when someone sais to me:

- What?!?!? You spent money on that program!?!?!? You are so stupid!!! I have it and I didn't spent a cent on it...

Know what I mean? Even if I'm right and I like to help and support software developers, I still don't like to be called stupid, directly or indirectly by people that use hacked software... specially when that software is developed by independent programmers and cost so little money.

The system developed by jdobbs is fair and above all... simplier.. you wouldn't believe the number of e-mail I get every day from people that erased accidentaly (don't ask me why or how) the key file and don't have the e-mail links for download anymore.

I get them as Administrator of www.dvdrebuilder.com... being optimistic I would say that jdobbs receives 3x the e-mail I get... if I loose 15 minutes answering the e-mails that means jdobbs will spend 45 minutes, right?
I guess at this point, many of the features on the "todo" list would be implemented. :)

keep it UP and... slow down.

[Video Dude]

I just wanted to thank jdobbs for providing a solution for me via email because I could not use the key program to retrieve a key.

Even though I am against software that requires an activation or computer ID, I must say that jdobbs is one of the most helpful and friendly software developers around.

[jdobbs]

Just so people will know, you will have the option of downloading a key on the next version update if you prefer not to use the registration software (personally I like it better, though). You just can't do that on the first instance, as I don't have SYSTEM IDs to use in the key generation.

I truly want to make all this as easy as possible.

[Zeul]

Time for my opinion :D

All i can say is hats off to jdobbs - i think his key approach is excellent. The amount of time he puts into this forum helping, is only to be congratulated - not forgetting his enthusiam on other boards also. And to all who complain about having to connect to the internet - how did you get the app in the first place? - off the net.

I reckon this thread has run its course - and as such closure is overdue.

[jdobbs]

I think you're right -- and closed it is -- thanks for the kind words and support.