Descramble DVD encryption in 7 lines of perl code
March 7, 2001 2:40 PM Subscribe
Descramble DVD encryption in 7 lines of perl code...created by 2 MIT programmers. Will the MPAA threaten to sue you if you include it in your email signature? Yah for civil disobedience.
hmmm...looks like it could potentially be a single line of perl code...but that would be difficult to see wrapped around a coffee cup.
posted by samsara at 3:10 PM on March 7, 2001
posted by samsara at 3:10 PM on March 7, 2001
Huh. Will you look at that. Somebody's selling a t-shirt.
posted by iceberg273 at 3:20 PM on March 7, 2001
posted by iceberg273 at 3:20 PM on March 7, 2001
Hot damn.
Reminds me of my college radio days. There was an FCC rule that stuck out in my mind about DJ's not being allowed to incite people to riot.
I just incited someone to make a (possibly) illegal t-shirt.
Hope they don't pull my internet broadcasting license.
posted by jasonshellen at 4:02 PM on March 7, 2001
Reminds me of my college radio days. There was an FCC rule that stuck out in my mind about DJ's not being allowed to incite people to riot.
I just incited someone to make a (possibly) illegal t-shirt.
Hope they don't pull my internet broadcasting license.
posted by jasonshellen at 4:02 PM on March 7, 2001
a (possibly) illegal t-shirt.
The t-shirt (not to mention the mug and mouse pad) is arguably legal under current laws:
Unlike some other DVD-descramblers, qrpff doesn't include the necessary five-byte title key -- such as 153 2 8 105 225 -- which must be given to the program so it can perform the necessary decryption.
That, says Winstein, means qrpff doesn't violate the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, which the movie studios used in a federal lawsuit against 2600. "Even if whatever is enjoined by that injunction in New York is a violation of the law, I think there's a reasonable case to be made that my seven lines of Perl isn't," Winstein says.
So your internet broadcasting license is safe for now.
posted by iceberg273 at 4:17 PM on March 7, 2001
The t-shirt (not to mention the mug and mouse pad) is arguably legal under current laws:
Unlike some other DVD-descramblers, qrpff doesn't include the necessary five-byte title key -- such as 153 2 8 105 225 -- which must be given to the program so it can perform the necessary decryption.
That, says Winstein, means qrpff doesn't violate the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, which the movie studios used in a federal lawsuit against 2600. "Even if whatever is enjoined by that injunction in New York is a violation of the law, I think there's a reasonable case to be made that my seven lines of Perl isn't," Winstein says.
So your internet broadcasting license is safe for now.
posted by iceberg273 at 4:17 PM on March 7, 2001
I dunno, iceberg273... I thought the MPAA's whole argument was that the algorithm itself was protected under the DMCA as a copyright protection device, not just the key data. It'll be interesting to see whether Valenti's dogs will go after this one. It may at least force them to clarify what, exactly, it is they're claiming is protected.
posted by Vetinari at 7:39 PM on March 7, 2001
posted by Vetinari at 7:39 PM on March 7, 2001
So, does this have any chance of winning the Obfuscated Perl Contest, you think?
posted by monosyllabic at 10:44 PM on March 7, 2001
posted by monosyllabic at 10:44 PM on March 7, 2001
No, becoz compared to the contest entries, it's not obfuscated at all. Plus, it's too long.
posted by sonofsamiam at 7:10 AM on March 8, 2001
posted by sonofsamiam at 7:10 AM on March 8, 2001
Speaking of long and obfuscated, you could also get all the same instructions in haiku if you prefer.
posted by nickmark at 7:09 AM on March 12, 2001
posted by nickmark at 7:09 AM on March 12, 2001
« Older Shakespeare and the electronic age | Nader editorial in the WSJ Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by jasonshellen at 3:01 PM on March 7, 2001