good technical look at the problems Vista content protection will cause
Tim Smith
here:
<http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~pgut001/pubs/vista_cost.txt>
Ouch!
Lefty Bigfoot
(in article <12ooclo...@news.supernews.com>):
> <http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~pgut001/pubs/vista_cost.txt>
"...Vista requires that any interface that provides high-quality
output degrade the signal quality that passes through it. This
is done through a "constrictor" that downgrades the signal to a
much lower-quality one, then up-scales it again back to the
original spec, but with a significant loss in quality. So if
you're using an expensive new LCD display fed from a
high-quality DVI signal on your video card and there's protected
content present, the picture you're going to see will be, as the
spec puts it, "slightly fuzzy", a bit like a 10-year-old CRT
monitor that you picked up for $2 at a yard sale. In fact the
spec specifically still allows for old VGA analog outputs, but
even that's only because disallowing them would upset too many
existing owners of analog monitors. In the future even analog
VGA output will probably have to be disabled. The only thing
that seems to be explicitly allowed is the extremely low-quality
TV-out, provided that Macrovision is applied to it.
The same deliberate degrading of playback quality applies to
audio, with the audio being downgraded to sound (from the spec)
"fuzzy with less detail".
Amusingly, the Vista content protection docs say that it'll be
left to graphics chip manufacturers to differentiate their
product based on (deliberately degraded) video quality. This
seems a bit like breaking the legs of Olympic athletes and then
rating them based on how fast they can hobble on crutches."
U G H. No, thank you.
--
Lefty
All of God's creatures have a place..........
.........right next to the potatoes and gravy.
See also: http://www.gizmodo.com/gadgets/images/iProduct.gif
Roy Schestowitz
Bad, bad Vista. badvista.org.
Microsoft expects people to 'upgrade' and get these splendid 'features'. More
and more freedoms are being conceded to favour the vendor and punish the
user, unconsentually.
Who do You Trust with Your Computing?
,----[ Quote ]
| Helios was speaking out against trusted computing (TC) and Digital
| Rights Management (DRM) that is humming softly at the hardware and
| software level inside YOUR computer right now. That's right! Chances
| are, it's already made it on a chip on your and my motherboards...but
| it's there. Soon, if what can happen does happen...we'll all be so
| very unhappy at being told how we can and can't operate our PCs.
|
| Some of you may be asking, "what the heck are you talking about?
| They can't tell me how I can use my computer inside my own home".
| Unfortunately, that statement is false. DRM chips are already on a
| majority of motherboards and even built into some processors (viiv
| anyone?). All it takes is a flip of the switch and you'll do what
| Microsoft or any other company that wants to manage your rights
| for you tells you to do whether you like it or not. That is, ofc
| ourse, unless you use Linux :) Linux has always been about
| choice...we choose to compute in ways WE want to...not ways
| that are defined for us.
`----
http://linux-blog.org/index.php?/archives/176-Who-do-You-Trust-with-Your-Computing.html
--
~~ Kind greetings and happy holidays!
Roy S. Schestowitz | Y |-(1^2)|^(1/2)+1 K
http://Schestowitz.com | Open Prospects Ś PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
Tasks: 138 total, 2 running, 134 sleeping, 0 stopped, 2 zombie
http://iuron.com - knowledge engine, not a search engine
Erik Funkenbusch
> The same deliberate degrading of playback quality applies to
> audio, with the audio being downgraded to sound (from the spec)
> "fuzzy with less detail".
>
> Amusingly, the Vista content protection docs say that it'll be
> left to graphics chip manufacturers to differentiate their
> product based on (deliberately degraded) video quality. This
> seems a bit like breaking the legs of Olympic athletes and then
> rating them based on how fast they can hobble on crutches."
It's really pretty simple. Vote with your wallet, but I think you're
failing to see the forest for the trees.
It's protected CONTENT that is the problem, not hardware or software that
supports the content. If all you buy is unprotected content, then the
hardware will play it just fine, without degraded quality. It's the
content providers that are pushing this agenda, and they're the ones you
have to hit in the pocket book.
It's simple. Don't buy protected content and they WILL get the message.
Failing to buy the hardware gives them the message that consumers don't
want the content at all. That's a different message than you want to send.
nospam
probably. Just ignore it. Fuck MS.
Lefty Bigfoot
(in article <1prtk769...@funkenbusch.com>):
> On Fri, 22 Dec 2006 19:44:14 GMT, Lefty Bigfoot wrote:
No, I didn't. I quoted it.
>> The same deliberate degrading of playback quality applies to
>> audio, with the audio being downgraded to sound (from the spec)
>> "fuzzy with less detail".
>>
>> Amusingly, the Vista content protection docs say that it'll be
>> left to graphics chip manufacturers to differentiate their
>> product based on (deliberately degraded) video quality. This
>> seems a bit like breaking the legs of Olympic athletes and then
>> rating them based on how fast they can hobble on crutches."
>
> It's really pretty simple. Vote with your wallet, but I think you're
> failing to see the forest for the trees.
I see the forest, and the trees. All of them are turning brown
from lack of water.
> It's protected CONTENT that is the problem, not hardware or software that
> supports the content.
No, it's an OS vendor that is doing things to aid people that
want you to only see a shitified version of the content you paid
good money for in the first place.
> If all you buy is unprotected content, then the
> hardware will play it just fine, without degraded quality.
So, ironically, the stuff you pay for will look like shit, while
the free stuff will look great.
> It's the
> content providers that are pushing this agenda, and they're the ones you
> have to hit in the pocket book.
They couldn't push it without Microsoft being on board.
> It's simple. Don't buy protected content and they WILL get the message.
Already done.
> Failing to buy the hardware gives them the message that consumers don't
> want the content at all. That's a different message than you want to send.
Not true at all. I don't want to support anyone in bed with the
bastards, which rules out the PC crowd entirely. The fact that
Apples can run Windows now really makes that difficult to
achieve.
Maverick
Well, I have to agree with you there in regards to not paying for
protected content.
Steve de Mena
It's too long to read. What's the executive summary?
Steve
Tim Smith
Uhm, the very first paragraph is headed "Executive Summary" and gives an
executive summary. You should have at least looked at it before
deciding it was too long! :-)
--
--Tim Smith
High Plains Thumper
I found this quote of interest:
| Overall, Vista's content-protection functionality seems
| like an astonishingly short-sighted piece of engineering,
| concentrating entirely on content protection with no
| consideration given to the enormous repercussions of the
| measures employed. It's something like the PC equivalent
| of the (hastily dropped) proposal mooted in Europe to put
| RFID tags into high-value banknotes as an anti-
| counterfeiting measure, completely ignoring the fact that
| the major users of this technology would end up being
| criminals who would use it to remotely identify the most
| lucrative robbery targets.
It seems they are more concerned with issues like for example,
DRM than true security. Also they have disabled high end PC
hardware features, which I am sure those opting for will not
like. S/PDIF and YPbPr have been disabled.
--
HPT
Steve de Mena
Where is S/PDIF disabled? It works on my Vista
system.
Steve
Steve de Mena
Ok, I skimmed it. This is no different than
dedicated HD or Blu-Ray players, or even DVD-Audio
and SACD (Super Audio CD) players. The
manufacturers do not allow that data to be sent
over un-copy protected digital means. Nothing new
here. On my Denon SACD/DVD player I need to
connect analog cables (5) from the player to the
amplifier to listen to SACD and DVD-Audio content.
Steve
High Plains Thumper
news:EfudneiUSuCUIxHY...@giganews.com:
It will work until you play "protected" content:
| Since S/PDIF doesn't provide any content protection, Vista
| requires that it be disabled when playing protected
| content. In other words if you've invested a pile of money
| into a high-end audio setup fed from a digital output, you
| won't be able to use it with protected content. Similarly,
| component (YPbPr) video will be disabled by Vista's content
| protection, so the same applies to a high-end video setup
| fed from component video.
--
HPT
Dan Johnson
"Tim Smith" <reply_i...@mouse-potato.com> wrote in message
news:12ooclo...@news.supernews.com...
This article seems to be describing the copy-protection
measures that HD-DVD and Blu-ray mandate. They are
quite stupid; strongly suggestedive of an industry that has
come to view its customers as The Enemy.
But last I heard, Vista was not going to include codecs for
these formats anyway. It was to be left to third-parties,
like DVD playing is in Windows XP.
Have the plans changed? I doubt it. The article is
full of breathless exageration in other areas; I
expect it's just wrong about this.
ZnU
What's *really* absurd about all of this is that nobody pirates content
by recording the uncompressed audio and video on their way to the
monitor and the sound system. People pirate content by ripping the
original data off the disc, and the on-disc formats for Blu-ray and
HD-DVD *will* get cracked, because these things always do.
At that point, the *only* purpose of all these restrictions will be to
discourage legitimate users from adopting the technology.
I mean, in my case, I have a 24" display and a computer fast enough to
decompress 1080p H.264 or MPEG-2... I should be able to play these discs
with a new drive ($100 in 12-18 months) and some software. Instead, I'd
also have to buy a new video card, and throw out my monitor; that'll
cost ten times as much.
Meanwhile, someone with a setup similar to mine who steals HD movies
from BitTorrent (and you know they'll be all over in six months) doesn't
have to buy any new equipment.
If you want a large number of people to buy your product, don't
artificially force them to spend upwards of $1000 buying other stuff
from other vendors first.
--
"Those who enter the country illegally violate the law."
-- George W. Bush in Tucson, Ariz., Nov. 28, 2005
Steve de Mena
The same way it works on my consumer electronics
(i.e. Denon CD/DVD/SACD/DVD-Audio player).
Microsoft has no control over this.
Steve
Steve de Mena
I didn't think SACD (Super Audio CD) had been
cracked yet.
Steve
ZnU
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_Audio_CD#Copy_protection
"There seems to exist one solution for obtaining digital non-DRM output
on SACD as well as DVD-A players. A Switzerland-based company is
offering a modified output-board that taps into the digital datastream
prior to D/A conversion as well as converting DSD to PCM that the spdif
port can transfer."
IOW, even a format that almost nobody cares about, that's completely
closed (there's no way for consumers to burn SACD discs, and I don't
think there are even SACD readers which hook up to computers), someone
*still* finds a way to get at your raw digital data.
Tim Smith
Steve de Mena <st...@stevedemena.com> wrote:
> >> Where is S/PDIF disabled? It works on my Vista system.
> >
> > It will work until you play "protected" content:
>
> The same way it works on my consumer electronics
> (i.e. Denon CD/DVD/SACD/DVD-Audio player).
> Microsoft has no control over this.
Last time I checked with my consumer electronics, if I play a video on
my TV that requires protection that the TV does not implement, my CD
player doesn't downgrade its output.
--
--Tim Smith
ZnU
Tim Smith <reply_i...@mouse-potato.com> wrote:
Audio CDs are, of course, an unprotected format.
This is, incidentally, what made "Rip, Mix, Burn" and the iPod possible;
because CDs were unprotected, and people were allowed to exercise their
fair use rights, Apple was able to build new value on top of the format,
in ways which the creators of the format probably never imagined. Note
that Apple has *not* been able to do the same thing with DVD, because
it's copy protected. DRM puts an end to such innovation.
It doesn't stop piracy, and the entertainment industry knows this by
now. So the question might be ask, what's their real motivation? Well,
if you're the record industry or the movie industry, you probably *like*
the idea that nobody can create new business models based around your
content without begging for permission and paying you kickbacks.
Steve de Mena
DVDs (movies) don't have that level of copy
protection. Try it with a SACD or DVD-Audio. (Or
presumably Blu-Ray or HD DVD, which I don't have yet).
Steve
Mitch
Mena <st...@stevedemena.com> wrote:
I think the worry isn't that this is a new method, but that they are
effectively removing the last flexible way to retain good quality.
It's about closing off the last ways to view media.
I personally have no problem with the content copoyright protection.
The problem is that it is being applied to more than just making sure
we pay for what we use. It's limiting choice, development, and viewing
options. It's going to force people to upgrade several pieces of
hardware. That's not just a fair way to protect their product -- it's
using that as an excuse to justify huge profits and sales for corollary
industries. Extremely unfair.
High Plains Thumper
> Ok, I skimmed it. This is no different than dedicated HD
> or Blu-Ray players, or even DVD-Audio and SACD (Super Audio
> CD) players. The manufacturers do not allow that data to
> be sent over un-copy protected digital means. Nothing new
> here. On my Denon SACD/DVD player I need to connect analog
> cables (5) from the player to the amplifier to listen to
> SACD and DVD-Audio content.
Steve, I read your bio off your website, an interesting read.
So you were involved with BBS's some time back, worked the
music industry, wound up in chocolate IT, races cars, does
music and photography. That's quite a been there done that
background.
With those I can identify. I've done real time software with
aerospace industry, spent some time with bands, worked
building automation systems, shot about a dozen weddings,
painted 8 or 9 cars, love to ride motorcycles, etc.
BTW, I noticed on your web hosting, Windows hosting is $10,
Linux hosting is $9.95 per month. I could not help but
notice a nickel's difference. Is there a reason?
--
HPT
Steve de Mena
Hi,
I am pretty much a silent partner most of the time
these days with regards to the web
hosting/development stuff. I was more involved
when it was all new and I established all of the
infrastructure stuff. Greg Gooden
(ggo...@annex.com) would be the man. I am sure
the nickel price discrepancy is some sort of
oversight.
Feel free to write privately with more
questions/comments (I use a real email address). I
am sure this is boring the folks here. :)
These days my day job is working with SAN
technology (EMC Symmetrix, CLARiiON, Celerra NAS,
IBM ESS, McData Switches) at a large healthcare
company.
Take care,
Steve
ZnU
ZnU <z...@fake.invalid> wrote:
Incidentally:
http://www.engadget.com/2006/12/27/aacs-drm-cracked-by-backuphddvd-tool/
[snip]
KDT
Vista's content protection is even worse and affects you even if you
never use your computer to view high resolution content.
"Once a weakness is found in a particular driver or device, that driver
will
have its signature revoked by Microsoft, which means that it will cease
to
function (details on this are a bit vague here, presumably some minimum
functionality like generic 640x480 VGA support will still be available
in
order for the system to boot). This means that a report of a
compromise of a
particular driver or device will cause all support for that device
worldwide
to be turned off until a fix can be found [Note H]. Again, details are
sketchy, but if it's a device problem then presumably the device turns
into a
paperweight once it's revoked. If it's an older device for which the
vendor
isn't interested in rewriting their drivers (and in the fast-moving
hardware
market most devices enter "legacy" status within a year of two of their
replacement models becoming available), all devices of that type
worldwide
become permanently unusable."
Steve de Mena
Why on earth would Microsoft disable a device
driver unless it was causing irreparable harm to
the system?
Note that this is enforceable in 64-bit Vista only.
Steve
KDT
Steve de Mena wrote:
> Why on earth would Microsoft disable a device
> driver unless it was causing irreparable harm to
> the system?
>
> Note that this is enforceable in 64-bit Vista only.
>
> Steve
According to the article, the device would be disabled if a crack
appeared that allowed the user to copy protected high-resolution
content. Meaning if there was a crack anywhere out there in the
wild...your hardware could be disabled even if you have no interest in
using high-definition content. This is not about harming your system,
it's about protecting content owmers.
ZnU
"KDT" <scarf...@yahoo.com> wrote:
HD-DVD and Blu-ray support this as well. Every player model (and
software player) gets a different device key, so they can be revoked
individually. This means if someone steals they key from the player
model you use, and starts using it to rip movies, new movies will drop
support for your player.
This could theoretically be fixed with a software/firmware update that
installs a new key, but what's to stop whatever security exists in the
update mechanism from getting cracked, allowing new keys to be extracted
immediately? Also, I seriously doubt regular people are going to update
the firmware on a non-network device sitting in their living rooms.
DRM is fundamentally broken. Encryption doesn't work if you give the
attacker the keys.
Maybe the next time, they won't make the keys publicly available. I
mean, sure, you won't be able to view the content, but the way the
industry is behaving, I think they see that as an ideal case. Heh.
Roy Schestowitz
Devices now being disbled for /these/ reasons? What about zombies and
hijackers? There are new scary Vista realities unveiled every day...
Just imagine that mother who goes to by a PC and the salesman who tries to
sell her the most high-priced PC, running Vista, of coruse (XP is still
available, maybe due to backlash and serious backward compatibility issues).
Then, the mother is forced to use her credit card to upgrade edition (Home
and Basic are literally crippleware and engineer to bring in more cash).
Then, music is all DRM'd, at least behind the scenes, leading to a long-term
always-approaching nightmare. The mother starts surfing the Web, unaware
that Microsoft tracks every move she makes in order to build a profile and
optimise search results, for profit. When she read her E-mail, Microsoft
scans the messages and begins to deliver ads everywhere, as though the
company has just read her mind (and her friends' mind). There are many more
nasties, but this is just a minddump... the PC and vendor use and control
the user. It's essentially just an apparatus for fulfilling one's interests
and milking cash.
I've never watched Minority Report, but it does remind me of a popular Jim
Currey movie that I watched about 10 years ago. Everything is being watched
and a taregetted lifestyle supersede any sanity that's inherent in privacy.
--
~~ Kind greetings and happy holidays!
Roy S. Schestowitz | "In hell, treason is the work of angels"
http://Schestowitz.com | Free as in Free Beer Ś PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
Load average (/proc/loadavg): 0.57 0.24 0.11 3/114 730
http://iuron.com - semantic search engine project initiative
Steve de Mena
If they were to disable something that prevented
other aspects of the system from functioning
(besides the high resolution content) they could
expect a ton of lawsuits.
Steve