Posted on 02/01/2007 6:21:11 PM PST by Space Wrangler
A Romanian-born programmer claims to have developed code that can bypass the Digital Rights Management (DRM) technology in Windows Vista. Writing in his blog, Alex Ionescu said that for over a year, he's been working on a method of getting around Vista's signed driver requirements and that he's recently succeeded.
As you might know, Vista requires that all drivers be digitally signed so that they can be properly authenticated to the OS. The 64-bit version of Vista requires what Microsoft calls Kernel Mode Code Signing (KMCS) in order to load kernel-mode drivers.
Vista also includes a technology called Protect Media Path (PMP), which essentially is a way to enable secure playback of "next-generation premium content," such as high-definition DVDs. The idea behind PMP is to prohibit access to unencrypted premium content to prevent the user from making copies that aren't approved by the content publisher. In order to facilitate trusted interoperability with premium content, any components placed into the PMP must be digitally signed for use with PMP.
Ionescu said that his code does not load any unsigned drivers and that he uses a special boot flag when starting Vista. He intends to release sample code that partially demonstrates his discoveries, but he won't release code that bypasses Vista DRM out of fear of being prosecuted under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA).
"Later this week I will release some safe, generic, proof of concept code that targets what I believe is a flaw in the Code Integrity/Driver Signing model.... Because this code will require an initial reboot [of the operating system] Microsoft does not consider it to be a flaw from a security standpoint. And because [the code I intend to release is] so generic, it has absolutely nothing to do with DRM or PMP. That being said, I'm sure someone with knowledge of the PMP implementation might be able to use this as a very smart building block of the entire code that would be required [to bypass PMP and DRM]," Ionescu wrote.
WINE is a viable option for most programs. WINE stands for WINdows Emulator, and will run most popular Windows programs in Linux. As the popularity for Linux continues to grow, that will become less and less of a concern though.
LMAO, you already admitted quote "Yes, I lied" when you attempted to claim the US DoD was extensively using software by Russian hackers, in defense of the Russian hackers that cracked OSX to run on cheap PC's. Which by the way seems to be pretty much the extent of your experience with OSX, since you don't seem to have a modern Mac yourself. It only took you months before you admitted the lies, which you claim was some sort of trick even though your hacker buddies failed them as well, but something tells me you're about to destroy another thread with your endless denials and further defense of foreign hackers LOL.
Second, that rule would kick in if he were to start distributing Vista.
I've already shown where criminal charges can be brought if only the hacks are distributed and not the hacked software itself. Once again you show no principle or honesty and put your continued failed defense of foreign hackers above all else.
As the years go by, I'm less and less enamored with MS, and Gates' stranglehold on the computing options for the unwashed masses. I hate spending money on things that seem not to be improvements. I want to retain control of my computer.
So what does the winner get these days, in the race to be the first to crack any new platform?
Siding with US companies that want to protect their intellectual property over foreign hackers that want to crack it is a "false choice logical fallacy"? Please explain.
I had written it on a Yamaha Motif ES8 and recorded it on an XP machine with Cakewalk 9 and Sony Soundforge.
According to Vista's DRM, I didn't have permission to PLAY MY OWN MUSIC.
Google the term, study it, and then come back if you're still confused about it.
That's a false dilemma. I take a stand on the side of the consumers, who are having their fair use rights stripped. The corporations have forgotten that copyright is supposed to be a balance of rights between the copyright holder and the people.
We ran a testbed of IE7 at work and I decided it was so incredibly bad I would never install it. I was pretty pissed when I recently rebuilt my gaming machine and had Windows Update try and install it. It should be optional software.
To test you, not to defend hackers. Thanks for playing, you can quit your libel now.
I've already shown where criminal charges can be brought if only the hacks are distributed and not the hacked software itself.
True, but you never found the profit condition necessary for criminality in their actions under the DMCA. The way they can be nailed without any profit is under the NET Act, which is where the $1K/180day rule kicks in for actually distributing the copyrighted work. You've been told this. I'm not going to feed the troll by going around in circles on this again.
Well you're clearly choosing a side whether you realize it or not. I believe in property ownership myself, and the right of the property owner to set prices of sale, and that the capitalistic market to ensure those prices are fair, not illegal activity. Illegal activity typically causes prices to go up, as more severe controls are required and implemented. Thinking that DRM controls will go down due to theft is the same as thinking a fence that is being jumped for illegal entry will be taken down, rather than a better fence going up in its place.
If you're going to defend illegal hacking by foreigners over protecting the property of US corporations, the burden of explanation is clearly on you.
If you don't understand the terms and rules of debate, you probably shouldn't be debating.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_choice
My bad for not getting my point across: my point was that it should be listed under "Software, Optional" sub-list of Windows Update without being pre-selected by WU.
LOL yeah right, you're defending them with more twisted BS again right here like usual.
Cracking Vista is a good thing. There are enough corporations to support Micrsoft's profits. For the rest of us, it should be free.
Vista has NOTHING that XP lacks, except cosmetic bullshit. Plus it has so many Big Brother aspects, that there is no way I will ever switch from XP.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.