Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Technology

New SecuROM Ties Protection to Physical Structure 421

Posted by CowboyNeal from the warez-arms-race dept.
bernardos70 writes "I read a brief article describing how the new version of secuROM, which is already present in newer games, employs a new encryption method which 'tie[s] itself specifically to the physical structure and characteristics of each disk'. Apparently companies are even ordering specially designed media to implement this method. I think that all this will do is frustrate the average joe trying to make legit copies, as the various groups online distributing ISO's are sure to find a way to bypass yet this new technology."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

New SecuROM Ties Protection to Physical Structure More

New SecuROM Ties Protection to Physical Structure

Comments Filter:

  • "legit copies" (Score:5, Insightful)

    by tomstdenis ( 446163 ) <tomstdenis@gma[ ]com ['il.' in gap]> on Thursday October 10, 2002 @05:38PM (#4427795) Homepage
    sure sure. Yeah, I was backing this up, my friends keep it for safe storage.

    Or how about you not buy them then?

    If the companies are so horrible, so evil, so mean, represent all that you loath, how about you *not* give them money?

    Duh....

    • If the companies are so horrible, so evil, so mean, represent all that you loath, how about you *not* give them money?

      What games are available from companies that don't use copy protection that's so intrusive that it gives a false negative on a significant minority of computers and corrupts the error-correction so much that the slightest speck of dust will render the disc useless?

    • Re:"legit copies" and games (Score:5, Insightful)

      by WinPimp2K ( 301497 ) on Thursday October 10, 2002 @05:50PM (#4427903)
      Actually, a "legit" copy can simply be a no-CD crack so you can keep the distribution CD safely in its jewel case rather than sitting in the drive. Of course, you are probably too young to remember the days of key disks (back in the days of 360K DSDD 5.25" floppies) and how big a pain in the butt they were then.

      Updating the key disk copy protection scam does continue to do more to inconvenience legitimate users than it does to prevent piracy. It was that way in 1982 and it is still that way today. And of course the newest version of this particular snake oil scam does require that the publishers buy special media - just like it did back then except that the snake oil peddlers have had 20 more years to refine their paranoia inducing sales pitches.

      So, the new snake oil costs more than the old snake oil, and the companies buying the stuff are now protected from "piracy". Pity they didn't think about protecting themselves from quackery.
      • Hahaha! Key Disks! I had totally forgotten those. That's exactly what these things are! As a footnote, I can guarantee that these games that they've "new SecuROMed" have already been cracked. Knock yourself out game publishers. You're just as lame as the CD people.

    • Re:"legit copies" (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 10, 2002 @06:03PM (#4428009)
      i DO by my own games.

      (faves: MOHAA, GTA3, half-life, thief.)

      the first thing i do is rip them to an .ISO, using "blindread".

      then the physical media goes in a large CD wallet thingy, archived.

      i can mount the ripped CD image using "daemon tools" virtual cdrom.

      hey, it even supports DVDs too! and even breaks them into multiple files to get around the 4GB
      file size limit, if necessary. (i run windoze 98 for games so that's real nice.)

      i don't like having to hunt down and swap physical media to play a game or watch a movie. with huge drives so cheap, why not have instant access to everything? that's the way i like it. one-click access to music, movies, games -- all of which i paid for.

      for ME, it's not about illegal copying. this is totally fair use.

      http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/6/26612.htm l

    • Re:"legit copies" (Score:3, Informative)

      by Jahf ( 21968 )
      Many games are produced by a one party (a'la Bioware) and are then distributed by another (a'la Interplay).

      It is usually the distributor who decides what encryption to put on a disk.

      Much like with music, if I don't purchase a CD because I don't like the distributor, I do more damage to the creator (artist/author) since the distributor has many games for sale and the creator usually only has one or two active titles.

      There have been movements in the past to get around some of this, both in games and in music, but none have been extremely successful.

    • Re:"legit copies" (Score:5, Insightful)

      by TRACK-YOUR-POSITION ( 553878 ) on Thursday October 10, 2002 @06:08PM (#4428046)
      The problem is that companies aren't pure evil--there are good people making cool shit, then there are assholes who add SecureROM to fuck up everything. Boycotting is pointless--we want the right to use the product we bought, so avoiding the product just bites off your nose to spite your face. Fair use rights aren't any good if you aren't buying anything.

      Duh...

      Actually, this is all besides the point. SecureROM really sucks. Not because it takes away fair use--but because it stops people from playing games, period. They recently removed SecureROM checks from Neverwinter Nights because they just wouldn't work on some people's computers (the game would always crash when starting up). Reportedly similar problems exist with Unreal Tournament 2003. If you find yourself in such a situation, the only solution is either to wait a couple of weeks for the company to maybe release a patch to end SecureROM checks, or to download a crack for the game. Thank goodness for haxorz.

    • Re:"legit copies" (Score:5, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 10, 2002 @06:37PM (#4428221)
      I'm not sure who you are talking to but I personally hate using original discs. There are several reasons:

      1) My CDROM drive has been known to scratch discs and even if it wasn't I would be worried about it
      2) I hate the sound of the disk spinning up and down
      3) Games run much faster from the hard drive
      4) Switching disks and keeping them in the right cases is a chore

      That's why I use ISO images even though I own the games.

    • You know (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Sycraft-fu ( 314770 ) on Thursday October 10, 2002 @09:10PM (#4428990)
      I don't have 160GB of harddisk space for no reason. Among other reasons, I have it so I can install everything to my HD and not have to worry about grabbing CDs when I want to use software. I want ot do a full install, and then be done with it. Put the CDs in the box and leave them there. Well, all my application software seems to be perfectly happy to let me do this. Office, Vegas, Visio, and so on were all perfectly happy to be installed and then just run of the harddisk. However almost all my game seem to want their CD, despite the fact that they have all the files on the harddrive. All they do is a stupid copy protection check. This is really annoying. I don't want to sort through a stack of disks to find the one for the game I want to play when it's already on the drive.

      It seems app makers are prefectly able to make money with out assinine copyprotections,. why are games so different?

      • Re:You know (Score:5, Insightful)

        by liquidsin ( 398151 ) on Thursday October 10, 2002 @11:27PM (#4429587) Homepage
        Most apps are for productivity, and most companies are willing to pay for legal copies of software that they find useful. Most games, on the other hand, are played by teens and college students (not to say that there aren't older gamers, but a higher percentage of teens are gamers than are 40 yr olds) and most people who fit that age bracket don't have the money for all the new games and don't have any qualms using warezed copies. Not to say that it's justified, but that's how it is. App developers can rely on the honesty of their target customers more than game developers.

  • Crypto, Schmypto (Score:5, Insightful)

    by ccoder ( 468480 ) <ccoder@NoSPaM.shiznor.net> on Thursday October 10, 2002 @05:39PM (#4427800)
    This won't work any better than the anti-CD copying methods RIAA has tried, nor keep people from copying the games any more than putting a piece of tape on a cookie jar will keep a hungry teenager from gettting in.

    With any encryption, any digital encoding method... if there is a way to play the game, there is a way to break the code. The question is who will be first? Wait and see.

    --

    • Re:Crypto, Schmypto (Score:5, Insightful)

      by iocat ( 572367 ) on Thursday October 10, 2002 @05:44PM (#4427840) Homepage Journal
      The point isn't to forever prevent hackers from cracking the protection, the point is to *delay* ISOs going out on the net long enough (30 to 60 days is fine) so that you maximize sales, especially among consumers "on the bubble" between piracy and purchasing. While there are many people who will pirate the game but wouldn't ever but it, if something's too easy to pirate, you will lose sales.

      • consumers "on the bubble" between piracy and purchasing

        Because it's apparently illegal to rent PC software, how is a casual game player behind a dial-up Internet connection (i.e. not a hardcore FPS addict) supposed to know if a game is fun before he or she pays upwards of $40 for a one-seat license?

        • Probably the same way as you determine if nearly every other product out there is worth your dough. Read reviews, ask your friends, try a sample/demo, etc.

          If game makers don't provide some way for people to try out a game with demos, etc., that's their problem if they want to lose money. But that still doesn't give you the right to download the ISO freely off of Kazaa...
        • Er, Demos?

          Like, those ones that almost every games company releases? That end up on magazine cover disks every month?

          Besides, the "casual player behind dial up" isn't downloading ISOs - they're the ones who buy retail.

          And further, just because you haven't tested it doesn't give you some "right" to pirate. If you want to pirate games, go for it. Knock yourself out. Just don't try and justify it with the "I was only trying it out" claptrap.
        • How do you know a football game is going to be any good before you pay for a one-seat license?

          You don't. You have to take risks for some rewards.

      • Re:Crypto, Schmypto (Score:3, Interesting)

        by Chaswell ( 222452 )
        Most of the games that are pirated are available from warez sources a couple of weeks prior to the games going on store shelves. I would bet the trend will continue. So in some ways I would agree with you, move the warez release out and more people will buy. I would say not 30-60 days, but maybe even a week would have an impact.

        There have been instances when I have played a game, enjoyed a game, and been bored with a game, prior to it ever being released to stores...no excuses here, just stating a fact.

      • Re:Crypto, Schmypto (Score:4, Interesting)

        by nhavar ( 115351 ) on Thursday October 10, 2002 @07:40PM (#4428581) Homepage
        Unfortunately this has an effect on the bubble by reducing the number of people who initially buy. Hard core gamers willing to part with the cash may not buy based on what they hear around the net about copy protection. Additionally if companies had a software return policy that encouraged not discouraged consumers from returning poorly made product or just something they aren't interested in, they might see their sales increase significantly. As it is right now I'm leary of buying any game until I know at least one person who has it and know's that it works well (isn't laden with bugs) and that it will hold interest for more than a day. Too many times I've gotten burned by $50 games that were either flakey or just trash. In the end the only policy is to return to the manufacturer which people just don't use. People need to be able to make legitimate backups and also need the right to return garbage in a timely manner. Current policies don't facilitate and can significantly hamper these needs.

      • Re:Crypto, Schmypto (Score:3, Insightful)

        by smblion ( 89885 )
        And that would be fine, if it actually worked. SecuROM is notorious for causing slowdowns, crashes, etc. In fact, of all the copy protection schemes around, it's probably the most irritating for legal consumers.

        In addition, the new games using SecuROM have already been cracked. Roller Coaster Tycoon 2 isn't even supposed to be out on store shelves until Tuesday, and the ISO is posted all over the internet, crack and all.

        The thing is, if the companies didn't spend so much money on copy protection, perhaps they could lower the software price a bit? And perhaps that would promote more sales? Unless software companies are willing to look at, and research, that option, then I am not willing to give them credit for making good business decisions. Copy protection has _never_ worked. Since the very beginings of it, with key disks (credit to the other person who brought this up first) to the most complex dongle based systems. It never has worked, and never will work. One day, publishers will figure this out. The question is, how long? It's been 20 years already.

      • This won't do that (Score:4, Insightful)

        by Sycraft-fu ( 314770 ) on Thursday October 10, 2002 @08:59PM (#4428951)
        Once it's cracked, and that won't take long, a general purpose cracker will be written that will crack anything with this kind of protection. That has happened already for both SafeDisc v1 and v2, LaserLock, all prior version of SecureROM and so on. It's really not very hard for a skilled cracker to break these protections apparently, and one it's done, they can (and do) just write a utility that will break it.

      • Re:Crypto, Schmypto (Score:3, Insightful)

        by jedrek ( 79264 )
        The ONLY thing this will do is prevent Joe Gamer from making a copy for his nephew. Pirate groups break copy protection, no matter if it's SecureRom, SafeDisc or whatever. It's a matter for honor for these guys to break the protection. The harder the protection, the bigger the challenge, the more 'fun' it is. If a crack is lacking someone will make a fix, either from the original group are a competitor.

        Generally, the competitive nature of scene makes sure that if something can get cracked and distributed, it will. And the quicker, the better. If these guys think that this will block more than casual and CloneCD piracy, then they need to wake up. Software publishers: stop fucking with your regular users investing truckloads of cash into copy protection, just make software worth buying.
    • this is not crypto, this is access control. totaly diffrent. one lets you access if you can figure out what it says, the other only lets you through if you have permition.

  • When will they learn?!? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 10, 2002 @05:40PM (#4427805)
    The warez kiddies just hack up the code to remove the copy protection check. As soon as this is done (often within hours of release), the copy protection is worthless. The people behind Neverwinter Nights finally figured this out and disabled the check in one of the program updates.
    • Actually, I think I kind of understand where this is coming from. I worked at a company that tried to be at the cutting edge of e-books (they fell off the edge, but whatever). I was a project manager and lead architect (sure blame me). I was constantly hounded by the biz and marketing side for more security and encryption on the books. I repeatedly told them how if a user can read it someone will figure out a way to copy it.

      One day I was taken in to our VP's office and told that he understood that someone would always figure out a way to copy the ebook, but could I come up with a way to keep our clients from being able to copy their own books. See if I could come up with a clever scheme that thwarted dumb publisher and his "tech-wizard" friend/brother/brother-in-law (who ever they may be) then they will at least think their books are secure. So I did, the clients ooh'ed and ahh'ed, and life was good.

      I am guessing that these new copy protection schemes have nothing to do with the actual populace that will use the games and more to do with marketing and biz talk.....bleck.

    • Re:When will they learn?!? (Score:3, Informative)

      by Maul ( 83993 )
      Actually, Bioware removed the Copy Protection from NWN mainly because it was causing a lot of problems for some people with certain CD-Rom drives.

      Then again, they did wait until far after the release date to release the patch that removed the checking (I believe that it was patch 1.22 where they removed the check).

  • Copying ? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by tmark ( 230091 ) on Thursday October 10, 2002 @05:40PM (#4427807)
    which is already present in newer games...all this will do is frustrate the average joe trying to make legit copies

    You know, the claims that some music CD user owner will want to make a legit rip/copy of some CD he bought is plausible. But how many game owners make backup copies of his game CDs ? And do people really want to argue that the majority of game CDs burned are for legitimate reasons ?

    • Re:Copying ? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Telastyn ( 206146 ) on Thursday October 10, 2002 @05:44PM (#4427845)
      I make backups of my game cds. I buy them, and because of assinine copy protection schemes, I need to keep switching the cds in my drive. Oddly enough, all that handling (and coke spillage and dropping and...) puts a little wear on them. Silly me uses burnt copies so I don't have to rebuy a game I already own.

      Certainly it is not the majority, but it's foolish to think that this sort of protection won't be circumvented within a week or two of release.

    • Re:Copying ? (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Atzanteol ( 99067 ) on Thursday October 10, 2002 @05:45PM (#4427857) Homepage
      Personally, I make copies of my games (legally owned) for use on my laptop. Who wants to chance losing/damaging their only CD while travelling?
      • I hear ya brother. If I take my laptop on the road I *detest* bringing along a fat sack of discs - nevermind bringing my only copy! But - even worse - I've got a Compaq Armada M300 and it doesn't have a CDROM internally. CD-checking games (all SecuROM and SafeDisc plus 99% of the rest) piss in my sandwich.

        Here's a portion of my (currently unhosted) website dedicated to users who have experienced similar problems with copy prevention schemes designed to rob us of fair use. (thanks to Slashdot for this intermediate hosting arrangement! three cheers and all that..)

        BACKGROUND INFO - diatribe from which one could conceivably deduce a mission statement It is truly unfortunate that many software companies refuse to sell their programs in M300-compatible form. I commonly install programs from a network, as I have no CD-ROM drive built into my machine. Unfortunately, this means that in order to use some programs, I must be networked with the original CD (copy prevention included) in another machine's CD drive. I find this situation to be less than acceptable, since I like to use my M300 notebook computer even when I'm NOT at home or in sight of a free CD drive! I believe that M300 owners (OK, the rest of you ultra-portable owners too) should not be the victims of this heinous discrimination. When one pays for a program, one expects to get fair use of that program; fair use should not exclude those lacking the means to afford persistent access to an external CDROM drive - or those with no desire for one, should it be affordable in any case..

        It truly is a pity that some manufacturers do not inform the user PRIOR TO PURCHASE that they will not be able to play their favorite games or other software on an M300 (or ANY machine without a CD-ROM drive) unless they have CONSTANT ACCESS to a CD-ROM drive. Instead, a CD drive is nominally listed under System Requirements - for the obvious purpose of installing the program, one would deduce. Hey! Guess what! I've found that a full install makes games run much more smoothly than an install that constantly reads from the CD. So - it would appear logically - that means I should be able to play my game from the hard drive. That sounds fair, eh?

        I have also found that NOT A SINGLE PROGRAM I OWN really requires a CD drive beyond the initial install (or subsequent re-installs.. c'est la vie, nest-ce pas?). If a CD is constantly needed, then it would be fair to say that one is REQUIRED. However, if the CD is needed only at install time, then this REQUIREMENT is in fact NOT an actual requirement per se. I would like to see a warning on products that constantly demand CD access, and for which no crack is easily obtainable ;) However, there are no programs yet that can demonstrate such a need to my satisfaction. It would be more accurate (and conversely less mis-leading) to list INITIAL SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS, and to have a separate listing of SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS based on the install options. A warning would also make my purchase decisions less painful - especially when I can't return an opened software package! What am I supposed to do with it then? Decorate my rearview mirror a la those ridiculous AOL coasters? Copy it and sell copies to make my money back? Gimme a break! Such practices are deceptive, and tantamount to robbery - robbery of ME, the paying customer..

        From the purely functional standpoint, CD-check routines embedded in popular Safedisc and SecuROM copy prevention doodads make zero sense because they decrease performance, effectively cripple my favorite computer, and render my CD drive (if I even have one.. not bloody likely) useless while a CD-checking prog is run. What if I want to listen to my choice of music while playing a game? Most game music is offensive (sorry WarCraft 2) or drives me nuts... should I be denied the use of my own music collection when I'm running a dog-in-the-manger program?! No.

        If you've read this far you probably deserve a break. Thank you for your patience. I get quite wound up sometimes when pondering the gaping a**holes who have ripped me off with their archaic "anti-piracy" routines. I have a few other thoughts on that, but I'll stow it for now... except for three brief spews:

        Message for the perpetrators of the CD-CHECK and COPY-PREVENTION CRAP (AKA CCCC):
        You are ignorant but I do not pity you because you lack the capacity to reason. As one does not pity the lower animals for their lesser cognitive capacities, thusly do I with-hold my pity. Please shove your rancid anachronistic cd-checking code up your p-hole where it belongs.
        IF YOU LIKE AND WANT TO USE A PROGRAM, BUY IT!!!*
        This simple statement has stopped more computer piracy than any cd-check or copy-protection scheme, in my personal experience.
        * Just make sure you don't get screwed by the jerks who force a cd-check on you. They can be awfully hard to spot, so be careful and have a site like mine handy! [editor's note - I had links to my favourite "M300 accessibility options" sites like Megagames.com and Gamecopyworld.com but in the interest of brevity I won't attempt to mirror the whole site here.... thanks for your understanding]

        and one final MESSAGE for all you losers that think that SecuROM (or your copy prevention of choice) or any kind of CD-check IS a legitimate copy-protection scheme:
        I fart in your general direction! A CD-check only prevents a program from being used in the absence of the original CDROM, or a darned good replica thereof. Smart software pirates know that hard-disk real estate is considerably more expensive than a 25-cent CDR, so they copy it to CD for future use. They don't let 25 dollar borrowed games clutter up hundreds of dollars worth of disk space forever. Hard-disk space is finite, but CDR has very few (spatial versus cost) limitations! This renders the cd-check effectively obsolete.
        This applies mainly to rented games and all that... For the bought games, the smart pirates know that it's better to crack a game and burn the cracked copy than an original with CD-crippleware intact. I won't get into online games that constantly demand updates because this was supposed to be a short rant and I've overstepped my griping boundaries already. Peace to all.

    • Re:Copying ? (Score:3, Informative)

      by mekkab ( 133181 )
      Given that you can get 100 blank CD's for $4, I back up everything IN SIGHT.

      Why? My linuxPPC disk set came with 4 disks (yes- I paid for it instead of DL'ing- its a show of support) and then my wife somehow broke the "additional stuff" CD (I think she put the cat on it... let's not talk about how big the cat is) Too bad I didn't make a back up.

      Cd's get scratched, eaten, and used for coasters and frisbees. It makes total sense to make backups. As part of said LinuxPPC distro I got a super functional FWB harddisk toolkit cd- such a handy thing (works with all types of harddrive partitions as opposed to apple's stuff, and has some other features) I'd hate to lose that- So I made 2 backup copies. I don't plan on giving 'em away. Its just something I don't want to see destroyed.

      If I'm paying money for something and I can get protection for less than $.25, then I'll back up JUST BECAUSE.

    • Re:Copying ? (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward
      >But how many game owners make backup copies of his game CDs ?

      I do. I only buy a couple of games a year, so it's not a big hassle - I started doing this after losing two games (==$100) to scratched CDs.

      > And do people really want to argue that the majority of game CDs burned are for legitimate reasons?

      I don't want to argue anything - I don't care what the majority does or does not do. *I* am entitled *by law* to make a backup copy of *my* software.
    • > And do people really want to argue that the
      > majority of game CDs burned are for legitimate
      > reasons ?

      and this is an argument defending stronger copying protections in what way?

      Whether or not the copies are used for legitemete purposes aren't at issue here, that's not something you, I, or the media outlets have a right to make a judgement on until something illegal actually happens.

      What's at issue is that consumers DO have the right to make a backup copy of any media they own, and apparently the manufacturers are trying to prevent that.

      The legality of pirating something or duplicating it are two totally seperate topics.
    • But how many game owners make backup copies of his game CDs ?

      I burned a copy of my StarCraft CD, because I had to buy a new copy of the game when my first CD got so scratched up from going to LAN parties. Now I bring the copy everywhere, and the original is safe at home.
    • But how many game owners make backup copies of his game CDs ?
      I'd say... every single gamer with a destructive younger brother or sister...

    • yes there is a need for legit copies (Score:5, Interesting)

      by asv108 ( 141455 ) <asv@@@ivoss...com> on Thursday October 10, 2002 @05:56PM (#4427956) Homepage Journal
      Yes, there are people out there who make legit copies of software for backup reasons, especially if you need the CD in order to play the game. If you play the game a lot, just the motion of taking the CD in and out of the tray can scratch it up to the point where it is unusable. I have quite a few games that I can't play anymore because the CD is scratched beyond recovery. Why do you think EB makes a fortune selling devices to clean CD's and DVD's? Every time I go in to that store, I get hounded to buy one.
    • People who have laptops that do not HAVE CD's will use tools to copy the cd to a virtual cd image on disk. Then they can play them without having to tote around the game cd.

      But I do it for the convenience of not having to manually swap the CD in the drive, because my monitor, keyboard and speakers are not in the same room as the system.

      • Maybe I should make that clearer: Some laptops don't have CDROM drives, or they are external and have to be lugged around and connected to use them.

        With tools like CD Space [cdspace.com] or I think daemon tools [daemon-tools.com] you don't have to deal with this hassle.

        These tools are CDROM emulators. You can scan in the image to a hard disk file on your desktop, then transfer the file to your laptop's hard disk. Then your laptop can mount the file as a "virtual cdrom" and you can install and play the game while traveling without a physical cdrom drive or the game CD. No lugging.

    • I travel, and play games on my laptop. I use Virtual CD to create a library of CD images of CD's that I already own, to save space. I don't know about the majority, but I know about my own practices.

      The fact is that the dedicated deadbeat will scour for cracked versions and find them. I, a paying customer, will get frustrated after not being able to play games I've bought in a way convenient to myself.

      Early frustrations with NWN actually motivated me to *find* a No-CD-crack site, which gave me opportunities to purloin that I'd never had bothered to look for before. I buy what I use, so I didn't avail myself of them (except to get a copy of NWN- which I did, mind you, pay for - that I could use while I travel) but such inconviences send paying customers into the arms of the warez kids. I really can't imagine this as something that the game producers would want to do.

    • Re:Copying ? (Score:2, Interesting)

      by Badaro ( 594482 )
      But how many game owners make backup copies of his game CDs?

      I didn't use to, until my Safedisc protected Diablo II Play Disc started giving me read errors, with less than an year of use.

      Funny fact: My four-year-old, unprotected Starcraft CD still works, even thought it's scratched beyond recognition. I guess those stories about protected CDs being more fragile may be true after all. Which is kinda funny, since that would mean the protected CDs were the reason I started making copies.

      []s Badaro

    • I accidentally stepped on my StarCraft CD once. You bet I wish I had backed it up :)

    • How about virtual CDs? (Score:3, Interesting)

      by Kjella ( 173770 )
      With todays harddisks of 100gb+, why not keep copies of the cds on the harddisk? Less noise (48x reader has a distinct annoying pitch), no searching for the cd, no changing cd, and the cd-rom is free when I need it, no need to go looking for that cover to put the old cd in. Plus it keeps my originals in mint condition.

      I don't *care* if they want to use my cd-rom as the modern-day dongle. It's a hassle, and I don't want it. It won't be the end of the world if I can't do that in the future, but don't pretend it's not useful and convienient.

      Kjella
    • I back up my games. If you want to search through the Neverwinter Nights forums you'll find that many people wish they did the same. The cd's apparently started displaying hair line fractures in some peoples high speed cdroms.

      The biggest issue to me is not the ability to copy, but the ability to play at all. I'll again use Neverwinter Nights as an example. The game was released useing securerom copy protection. Unfortunatly for many of my friends, and apparently many of Biowares customers, the "Play" disc that contained the copy protection couldn't be read by a great many drives. So, while there was a no cd patch, and iso's floating around about a week before retail, people that bout legit copies of the game couldn't play it. According to Bioware it was Infogrames that decided what copy protection to use as they are the publisher. Unfortunatly for Bioware it reflects badly on them the most. Infogrames on the other hand doesn't seem to care since the new Unreal release has also been released with this awful copy protection scheme, once again hurting paying customers more than anyone.
    • I make copies of game CDs so me and my brother don't have to share a physical CD. Illegal? On the verge of, maybe. But I only keep the game around to play him multiplayer, and $100 (2 copies) to play a single multiplayer game is over the top. Besides, I can play multiplayer in my PS2 games for the cost of one CD, after all. They really need to change licenses to per-household. It's not like anybody buys multiple copies for multiple computers in a house anyway!

    • Re:Copying ? (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Jester99 ( 23135 ) on Thursday October 10, 2002 @08:19PM (#4428758) Homepage
      The installation instructions for Doom ][ (v1.666 baby!) actually specifically stated "Step 1: Find five formatted diskettes. Create an archive copy of all five Doom ][ installation diskettes."

      And you know what? Two years later when on a whim I wanted to put Doom on my newer machine, one of id's disks had gone to the great bitbucket in the sky. But I had a second copy, right there. John Carmack, bless you.

      You don't have to argue that the majority of game CDs are burned for legitimate reasons. The point is that there are legitimate reasons. If my game CD is destroyed (they only have a 5-10 year life expectancy after all), then what do I do? Either use the archive CD (oops, don't have one), or search for it on KaZaA. (Hey, I legally bought it, I can download it right? Oh, wait, they made it uncopyable. So I suppose it wouldn't be available on KaZaA then, would it?)

  • Score one for overzealous web filters! (Score:3, Insightful)

    by gblues ( 90260 ) on Thursday October 10, 2002 @05:41PM (#4427814)
    Anyone care to post a mirror for those of us who cannot view the site thanks to workplace filters?

    Nathan
    • I have no idea how sturdy 3DGPU's server is either, so this may serve a double purpose in case it goes down:
      ----------

      Latest SecuROM Foils Even The Best CD Copiers

      Posted by Paul Sullivan on October 10th, 2002 - Thursday 11:32 am

      I have been getting a good stream of emails regarding the trouble copying the latest games with SecuROM protection and have been working to determine what is up, and after some hardcore telephone dialing, begging and pleading, have uncovered some information you all should know about. More than two individuals at two different companies (who unfortunately don't want to go on the public record for fear of reprisals) have confirmed to me that the latest SecuROM protection was designed specifically to thwart even the best current methods of copying.

      From what I have been told, the new configuration uses a special glass master and pressing media with certain unique characteristics that allows the SecuROM protection to tie itself specifically to the physical structure and characteristics of each disk so that copies are very difficult if not impossible for the average consumer to make. I was further told that since copy protection companies were not able to get many CD drive manufacturers to comply with requests to build protection detection into their firmware and other aspects of the drives, the copy protection companies opted to go with one thing they can control - the physical media itself. The media is apparently special ordered and not designed to be made available to the public. Kind of like how you are issued keys to your post-office box that are not supposed to be copied by retail shops or how some new keys include custom microchips that cannot be duplicated by key fabs for public use.

      If copying is to be able to be done, the thought is that true 1:1 copies will not be possible, since the protection is tied to each specific disk it is implemented on. If a fix is to be made, it will have to be on the software end, it appears. Don't hold your breath, however, as developing software that is specifically designed to thwart such protection is now subject to the DMCA, at least for now. Of course, we all know how that can turn out. We will need to wait and see if CloneCD, BlindWrite, CD-Mate or others can find a way to strip the protection from the original while duping, or perhaps find a way to alter the copy protection as it is transferred so that it recognizes the characteristics of the blank CD in use.

      I was also told that No-CD hacks are not something these folks care much about. A couple of folks told me that No-CD hacks are pretty benign and if it keeps a loyal customer happy, they are ok with it. It is the copy and dissemination of the originals that seems to be what they are worried about. More as it becomes available. Any info you can share would be welcome here in the comments area.

  • Timeline (Score:5, Funny)

    by commonchaos ( 309500 ) on Thursday October 10, 2002 @05:41PM (#4427817) Homepage Journal
    Oct 8, 2002 - h4x0r j03 breaks secuROM
    Oct 9, 2002 - secuROM announced
  • I don't understand this. How can the encryption be tied to the physical structure of the disk, be able to play in any cd rom drive, yet be uncopyable.

    I understand that perhaps you could say well, sector X is going to be unreadable, and if it is readable, then it isn't a legit copy, but I don't see any other way that this is possible, yet still able to run in CD drives. (Of course, I don't specialize in hardware of this sort.)

  • That's no problem (Score:5, Interesting)

    by SexyKellyOsbourne ( 606860 ) on Thursday October 10, 2002 @05:43PM (#4427832) Journal
    Most warez comes with cracks for SecuROM or whatever else already distributed with ISO, and whenever there's a patch, the patches are quickly cracked and distributed everywhere.

    Even CD-Keys don't make much of a difference for not paying for the game -- servers are being cracked and emulated like crazy in everything from War3 to Battlefield to UT2k3 (just use buddy-lists).

    There are a lot of people out there in the "scene" who are absolute Gods in disassembly and cracking, and nothing on Earth can stop them -- these people get the game and crack advanced protections on the way home on a laptop in a car.
    • well, if you can dissassemble it or decompile it, then all you need to do is be very fast at reformating the lump of code and then making sence of the generic variable names.

  • Once again... (Score:5, Informative)

    by futuresheep ( 531366 ) on Thursday October 10, 2002 @05:43PM (#4427833) Journal
    For all your noCD needs.

    NoCD's [gamecopyworld.com]

    Remember to ONLY use these files for legitimate purposes.

  • The article doesn't go into that much detail and the author even asks for more info. Never the less it peaks my interest. I know almost nothing about this stuff but it reminds me of the old playstation "empty spots" trick. Since a dvd/cd is just a dvd/cd I wonder what type of physical chars can be found. I would love to hear more.

    I'm not overly worried though. Someone will figure it out in the next day.

  • Legit Users (Score:5, Interesting)

    by monthos ( 591823 ) on Thursday October 10, 2002 @05:43PM (#4427837) Homepage Journal
    Warez groups may be who they say this is against, but in all honesty we know its just the companies making sure average joe user doesnt make a copy, as weve already seen many times before, companies believe we dont have a right to make a legit backup.

    Which then means we do have to use the warez scene as a resource to get our "backups". it may have been there BS excuse for a long time, but as more of this technology comes to be, they actually are fullfilling that purpose :)

    • Let's be honest here, how many people go through the process of backing up their CD-ROM data? I mean, if the CD doesn't need to be used after install the CD-ROM should be your backup source.

  • No wonder... (Score:4, Interesting)

    by cybercomm ( 557435 ) on Thursday October 10, 2002 @05:44PM (#4427841) Homepage Journal
    SecuROM(TM) is a CD-ROM (DVD-ROM) copy protection solution
    developed by Sony DADC which allows publishers to ...

    Looks like someone is trying to cozy up to RIAA... Haven't they learned anything from Micro$oft? What next? A palladium enabled di$cman?

  • I fail to see how this works... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Lil'wombat ( 233322 ) on Thursday October 10, 2002 @05:44PM (#4427850)
    OK so the decypt key is encoded on the CD in some non-standard way and that the key is extracted by special software from the company.


    So this non-standard encoding can be read by every type CD-ROM drive on the market?


    So now instead of having to crack the serial number or what not, someone just needs to crack the reader program?


    And this protect your software how?

    • Re:I fail to see how this works... (Score:4, Interesting)

      by deanpole ( 185240 ) on Thursday October 10, 2002 @07:53PM (#4428633)

      Normal CD data is written as a single long spiral. The protected disks have a big spiral too, but somewhere (or in multiple places) there is a short extra spiral along the big one. A normal read or ISO image would not discover the short spirals because it follows the big one the whole way through, but they can be uncovered by repeatedly seeking to the sector and getting lucky. Traditional CD drives & drivers work fine provided you can avoid the disk cache.

      Even if you trick the API and discover the short spirals, they would not be writeable to a CDR.

      BTW, did you know how CD players follow tracks? They have a astigmatic lens, which distorts spots to an elipse when going out of focus. astigmatic means the virtical lens curvature differs from the horizontal, so they have different focal depths. Propper tracking is inbetween these two distiances creating a fuzzy round dot. The direction of error can be determined by the orientation of the elipse.

  • I think that all this will do is frustrate the average joe trying to make legit copies, as the various groups online distributing ISO's are sure to find a way to bypass yet this new technology."

    This seems to be a sentiment that is frequently expressed: Company "A" implements new copy protection scheme. The protection works for a given period of time (often very short) until the hackers reverse-engineer it and bypass the copy control mechanism. I can't think of a single circumstance in which this hasn't happened. (IE: Company "A" makes unbeatable copy-protection mechanism). Will it ever be possible for companies to make a fool-proof copy mechanism, or is it hopelessly useless? If it isn't possible, why do so many companies keep trying? I realize they probably hope that the copy protection will at least last for some period of time that their products are still worth something in the market. But where is the end? It seems impossible to come up with something that can't be circumvented with enough determination. Any input on this?

    • standard response... 90% of consumers would copy the cd and give it to friends and have probably tried... if that doesn't work they assume "security" is in place, or they got a virus [slashdot.org] and leave it at that. pretty sure my mom doesn't know where to look for an ISO crack on IRC...
      • You missed the fact that quite a few people get the cracked version (cd w/crack) in the first place, which then spreads like wildfire... At least, that's how I remember friends sharing cds, data parties, broadband etc. to be working. Maybe your mom doesn't have either of those, but I really don't think your mom and friends make up 90% of game sales.

        Kjella

  • Suck-U-Rom (Score:3, Funny)

    by tokki ( 604363 ) on Thursday October 10, 2002 @05:45PM (#4427866)
    That name is asking to be made fun of.

  • Putting the dongle on the disk (Score:4, Insightful)

    by parliboy ( 233658 ) <parliboy@gm[ ].com ['ail' in gap]> on Thursday October 10, 2002 @05:46PM (#4427868) Homepage
    According to the article, they don't even care about no-cd hacks. They're just trying to make it harder to complete 1:1 copying.

    As per standard, though, all they're doing is screwing over legit customers. There's increased incompatibility and program crashing with this newest version. Those of you with half a brain who are getting naughty copies aren't slowed in the least by this stuff.

    I mean seriously, go visit packetnews and see just how little this has slowed down the spread of UT 2003. The initial release wasn't even a nuke.

  • well (Score:3, Insightful)

    by 2000 Britneys ( 549923 ) on Thursday October 10, 2002 @05:46PM (#4427872)
    this copy protection seems to be pretty good, how ever how long till someone will come up with another magic permanent marker fix to get rid off it?

    and this bit of info:

    "I was also told that No-CD hacks are not something these folks care much about. A couple of folks told me that No-CD hacks are pretty benign and if it keeps a loyal customer happy, they are ok with it. It is the copy and dissemination of the originals that seems to be what they are worried about."

    semms to indicate that they are not worried about a casual copying of their media but rather want to prevent wide scale comercial copying by the "sham wham" industry giants out of Tiwan and China
    • semms to indicate that they are not worried about a casual copying of their media but rather want to prevent wide scale comercial copying by the "sham wham" industry giants out of Tiwan and China

      A friend bought some games when he was in Turkey, including Civ3. It was the cracked version (the deviance-release). It even got printed instructions on how to copy the cracked .exe from the crack-dir :)

  • Seeing as how the current SecuROM games don't work (Score:5, Funny)

    by SetupWeasel ( 54062 ) on Thursday October 10, 2002 @05:49PM (#4427896) Homepage
    I think that they ought to tighten security, so that no one who purchases a game will ever be able to play it. Then you could put a copy of astroids 1000 times on a CD write "Unreal Tournament 2003" on the cover and no one would ever know! And if someone did manage to crack it, you could then tout the flawlessness of your new security measures as it tricked the pirates into making a thousand copies of asteriods!

    THIS IS THE FUTURE OF GAMING!

    GOD BLESS AMERICA!

    SetupWeasel

  • Tycho Brache said it best... (Score:5, Funny)

    by Drakon ( 414580 ) on Thursday October 10, 2002 @05:50PM (#4427900) Journal
    this was kinda long, so I'm gonna link [penny-arcade.com] to the original and quote some choice passages...

    there is some more ranting on the subject on the UT2k3 release day [penny-arcade.com]
    "when I go out and buy your Goddamned game, and you proceed to rob me of my time and clock cycles with copy protection schemes you imagine secure your bottom line, please let me assure you with the utmost gravity that you are living in a fantasy world. You might as well be drinking fairy wine out of an acorn cap, discussing the finer points of Gryphon Husbandry with their comely queen. The only people these Goddamn mechanisms of yours screw are paying customers, because people who just want to steal your game have always had very easy time of it. You are credulous in the extreme if you perceive otherwise. Put it out of your mind. I said, put it out of your mind."
    "There's a halfway house for retardeds like you right across the street from me, you'd love it. They just circle the block, singing songs and drinking Pepsi. Sometimes, they lay by the tree and drink the Pepsi. I never see anybody drinking anything else over there, maybe you get in trouble. It's either that, or Pepsi sponsors congenital defects."

  • How are we supposed to make backups? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Eric_Cartman_South_P ( 594330 ) on Thursday October 10, 2002 @05:51PM (#4427916)
    This is getting crazy. How the hell am I suppoed to make a backup? I buy all my s/w but this crap might make me spend a little more time on P2P is you know what I mean.

    Dear HardAss Publishers,

    If you do this en-masse, you will force many honest people to hit P2P so they can avoid your draconian DRM and copy-restrictive, fair-use bashing tactics.

    Regards,

    Buying Public

  • Cracked (Score:3, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 10, 2002 @05:52PM (#4427930)
    Unreal Tournament 2003 was ripped, cracked, and distributed before it made it to most stores. This is the new SecuROM they're touting.

  • reminds me (Score:2, Interesting)

    by garglblaster ( 459708 )
    reminds me of 'good old days' (-*very old days*-) actually when we scratched the floppy disks (the big ones) with a knife to produce 'bad blocks' and then to check for the presence of those bad blocks in order to verify that the disk was genuine..

    --man those were the days..-

    that was even before the C64 came out..Anyone remember the commodore PET ?

  • it's been done before and it doesn't work (Score:3, Interesting)

    by g4dget ( 579145 ) on Thursday October 10, 2002 @05:57PM (#4427964)
    People used to do something similar with floppy disks: they'd punch a bunch of holes into some track and they could measure their presence and location by seeing where they couldn't write. It's a property that cannot be copied by a regular floppy disk drive.

    It turned out to be futile. People just disabled whatever code depended on it. And if the locations of the holes were used as a cryptographic key, people would just recover the key and hack the executable to supply it.

    On current operating systems, where applications can't talk directly to the hardware anyway, you can do something even simpler: you just emulate whatever that special track contains by recording it on the source disk and replaying it through the driver on the destination drive. And if the drivers ever were to become secure, a small FPGA inserted into the ATA cable between the CD-ROM and the controller would give you the same capability completely transparently.

    But the biggest problem with these approaches turned out to be that consumers just didn't like them and preferred software that didn't have such annoying mechanisms built in.

    Overall, copy protection is a losing battle. The cost software vendors suffer in usability and customer good will is apparently higher than the losses from piracy that they stop.

  • Moving on (Score:3, Interesting)

    by MadFarmAnimalz ( 460972 ) on Thursday October 10, 2002 @05:57PM (#4427966) Homepage
    Securom has nothing to do with the physical media. Look it up on google if you want.

    Does your writer: 1. read and write RAW DAO and sub-channel data?

    Does your burning software of choice: 1. write in RAW mode 2. with sub-channel data?

    End of story.

    This doesn't even need to be cracked... It's below cracking...

  • Let me state that I realise this is necessary and I approve of it because I'm anti-piracy and anti-pirate, but I do think it's sad.

    A games publisher sees its product as just that, a "product". They ship it to stores, sell however many copies in month, sell a few more thousand over the next year, and that's it.

    But games become a part of people's lives. There are some games that are an important and beautiful part of my life and history. If those special games such as Head Over Heels (15 years old?) and Quake (8 years old?) could only survive for the lifetime of their original physical storage medium, people like me would be losing something which is very special to them.

    That all sounded kinda wussy and no I'm not some games junkie with no friends and no life, but occasionally a game comes along that has the little 'something' that sparks a fire in my soul. I'd like to know I can look back on that game in years to come, just as I look back on a photo album, and relive all of the memories. I'd hate to lose that because of an anti-piracy system and the pirates that it is intended to defeat.

    Incidentally, spot the similarities?

    http://www.securom.com [securom.com]
    http://www.uncensored-news.com [uncensored-news.com]
  • Sure we make "backups" which we freely give away therefor they shouldn't be allowed to protect the things they've spent a few years and a good deal of $ on (we are talking 7 digit (that's 6 zeros) figures.) But read the fine print (last paragraph that you think you know will say):

    No-CD hacks are not something these folks care much about. A couple of folks told me that No-CD hacks are pretty benign and if it keeps a loyal customer happy, they are ok with it. It is the copy and dissemination of the originals that seems to be what they are worried about.

    Wohaa, they do know that a No-Cd crack is made to make the game run without the cd, just the data which can be sniffed right from the IDE-bus or something like that. If they could make uncrackable software they would have had a chance, but they can't. So to the point. IMHO they should put their money elsewhere, give the users something for the money that they can't copy ("Buy X-game and get a free ..." or they should do some (non-lame) education of the people or simply all go mmorpg where the game cd won't do much without a subscription. (Although I guess illegit servers would keep popping up, but that's another story/problem.)
    • I purchased Return to Castle Wolfenstein because it came with all sorts of neat little extras... I purchased Diablo II because it came with a DVD...

      I don't understand why companies don't package more bonus materials with their games... I perfer having a nice glossy manual, some extra stuff (like DVD of movies, or some other collector item), but when I get a game like NFS 3 was, where the manual looked like it was photocopied, and there was a CD in a sleve, in an otherwise empty box for $59.99... Screw them!

  • Opcode JMP (Score:2, Interesting)

    by incog8723 ( 579923 )
    The oldest and easiest way to circumvent copy protection schemes is to use a JMP opcode. A debugger, and about 5 minutes of examination is all it takes. What in god's name are these people thinking? Copy protection has never worked, and it never will.

  • 100% Copy Proof Discs (Score:3, Funny)

    by CastrTroy ( 595695 ) on Thursday October 10, 2002 @06:14PM (#4428085)
    I'm looking to patent this new technology I thought of. The process consists of making music cd's that are scratched to hell, and therefore cannot to listened to, or copied. I'm proposing this idea, because, I know, and hope the RIAA realizes that the only way to have music you can't copy is if you can't hear it. If you can hear it, You can copy it. Damn, those RIAA guys are sooooo dumb...

  • Copies?? How about just playing? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Zygote-IC- ( 512412 ) on Thursday October 10, 2002 @06:16PM (#4428107) Homepage
    I think that all this will do is frustrate the average joe trying to make legit copies, as the various groups online distributing ISO's are sure to find a way to bypass yet this new technology."

    This security software being used to thwart piracy of computer games has done nothing but force me to those sources in order to play the game at all.
    Three times in the last year I've bought software only to find that the "security software" on the CD is incompatible with my drive.
    I actually told the EA guy that the only thing this seemed to prevent was me from playing the game I bought legally. He said he was sorry and offered a refund but that still doesn't allow me to play the game.
    So I go to the dark side, download the crack, and play the game.
    My boxed copy sits on my bookshelf because I have to turn to the pirates to play a game that you want to keep out of the hands of pirates..oh the irony.
    And those bastards still have my money. I'm such a sucker.

  • CD-RD (Score:3, Funny)

    by jukal ( 523582 ) on Thursday October 10, 2002 @06:18PM (#4428116) Journal
    So I quess, CD-RD (CD-ReDamage) will be the next big hit.

    a new encryption method ties itself specifically to the physical structure and characteristics of each disk

    This unique system will naturally allow you to damage your CD-RD to match the characteristics of the original perfectly. Once you are waiting for this product, why don't you brute force [google.com] your ILLEGAL copies to get the same effect.

  • Already broken (Score:3, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 10, 2002 @06:18PM (#4428117)
    Hitman 2 employed this new securom protection and was released on the same day it was released. Granted it wasn't discovered that there was a new protection until later that day. Within a few more hours another group had re-released a working copy with the new securom protection defeated.

  • Oh it gets a lot more interesting too.... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by MortisUmbra ( 569191 ) on Thursday October 10, 2002 @06:20PM (#4428131)
    SecuROM is already out, one such game is Hitman 2. Being an unlucky sould who bought the game I was greeted with a ncie suprise. Buggy as HECK, crashes constantly, can't even make it past certainllevels. It IS hacked already thogh as there is a cracked .EXE on certain sites already. So "might make it harder" is moot, this "new" version is already DoA. What's even MORE interesting is that the only way MANY of us have been able to get the game to work is to used the cracked .exe....turns out SecuROM is screwing up the game.... What fun! Certainly kept hackers at bay!

  • Other Methods ... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by mustangdavis ( 583344 ) on Thursday October 10, 2002 @06:21PM (#4428135) Homepage Journal
    Instead of doing lame ass physical security, try something like what the folks at Blizzard did with War Craft III.

    Yes, it doesn't stop people from pirating the game, but checking CD keys and such to see how often they are used when playing online (what fun is a game if you can't play it online?) seems to be a fairly good way to keep your "average" kiddie pirate from stealing your software.

    Besides, if you make your game/software good enough, people generally will want to support it. To all software companies: How about worrying more about the quality of your products and wasting less time figuring out how to prevent people from stealing them???

  • Copy protections such as this, do nothing more then piss the average user off.. A year or so back, an RTS called Emperor: Battle for Dune came out, and when I finally BOUGHT the game, I brought it home, only to find that the setup program wouldn't load, giving me some error about the cd being a copy. After screwing around with it for an hour or so, I called the game's tech support line.. (Which was long distance, naturally..) After waiting on hold for a good 20 minutes, they told me they were aware of my problem, and that it was caused by thier copy protection (SafeDisc 2), and told me that I would need to buy a new CD drive to play the game. Needless to say, I was pissed. I told 'em I'd be returning the game to the store, and downloading a copy of it off the internet, and hung up on 'em.

    When are they going to learn, that they won't be able to stop the hardcore warez groups from releasing thier games a week before they show up in stores? I believe they should include basic protection, such as SafeDisc 1, and leave it at that. That'll stop Joe Newbie from coping the game, and giving it to all his friends, while at the same time, not screwing a small part of thier legitimate buyers..

  • How could this possibly work? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Trogre ( 513942 ) on Thursday October 10, 2002 @06:24PM (#4428161) Homepage
    If the physical structure can be determined by a CD reader, then surely that can be mimicked by a CD writer?

  • Lotus123 tried this (Score:3, Interesting)

    by io333 ( 574963 ) on Thursday October 10, 2002 @06:41PM (#4428242)
    For those of you older folks, you may remember when Lotus123 came out with the first copy proof protection scheme in 1983? They burned a little hole in the disk with a laser beam. Let's see, that took about two days before it was cracked.

  • Don't buy the game / audio... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by nuxx ( 10153 ) on Thursday October 10, 2002 @07:01PM (#4428369) Homepage
    You know... If you don't like the fact that certain vendors are using a certain type of protection, you could always not buy the game. I don't mean pirate it, I mean just plain old don't buy it, don't play it, don't do anything with it.

    It's not like your rights are being infringed on by someone choosing to copy protect their game. You don't HAVE to buy it. You don't HAVE to be a consumer. You can CHOOSE for yourself to skip that product because you don't like some aspect of it. That is truely voting with your dollars and your feet.

  • How it's most likely done: details (Score:5, Informative)

    by Ryu2 ( 89645 ) on Thursday October 10, 2002 @07:24PM (#4428503) Homepage Journal
    First off, this is not the first time someone's tried it -- the scheme I describe is also used in 'StarForce' and 'TIES' protections, which also have not been broken (other than via no-CD cracks, of course).

    Basically, the system works by measuring the angle between certain sectors. How does it do it? By timing the seek time between these sectors. First, the disc will do several seeks of various sectors with known angles to 'calibrate' it, and then, it does seeks of various random sectors (to compensate for various drive speeds). If the timing of the sectors is not within a certain tolerance, that indicates that the physical geometry of the sectors is not the expected angle, and it knows it's not a real copy.

    Because CD burners do NOT preserve angle geometry when copying a disc, and even successive burns on the same burner/media may result in different angles, this is so far a fool-proof way. On the other hand, since production CDs are made by pressing with a stamper, not burning, it's not an issue for them.

Slashdot Top Deals

It is easier to write an incorrect program than understand a correct one.

Close