<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><?xml-stylesheet title="XSL_formatting" type="text/xsl" href="rss_style.xsl" ?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
<channel>
        <title>ZDNet Blogs</title>
        <link>http://blogs.zdnet.com</link>
        <description>ZDNet Blogs Focus: DRM</description>
<item>
<title>Radiohead and the search for content business models</title>
<link>http://blogs.zdnet.com/open-source/?p=1643</link>
<pubDate>Tue, 06 Nov 2007 08:28:13 -0800</pubDate>
<dc:creator>Dana Blankenhorn</dc:creator>
<guid>http://blogs.zdnet.com/open-source/?p=1643</guid>
<description><![CDATA[Early results are in on Radiohead's experiment in "name your price" music with their album In Rainbows. Most people chose free. These are early returns. A CD's economic lifespan can be two years. Given the millions still being raked-in by Elvis Presley, John Lennon and George Harrison, I'd say reputation is worth a lot more than that. Radiohead is far from the first act to try and break away from the grip of music publishing. Prince tried it. David Bowie tried it. The biggest such success among new bands was the Arctic Monkeys, who used community to gain a #1 hit, then went back to the old model. The real problem here, I think, is that we have been relying upon artists to innovate ... ]]>
</description></item>
<item>
<title>Macrovision plugs gaping hole in DRM software </title>
<link>http://blogs.zdnet.com/security/?p=635</link>
<pubDate>Mon, 05 Nov 2007 05:24:45 -0800</pubDate>
<dc:creator>Ryan Naraine</dc:creator>
<guid>http://blogs.zdnet.com/security/?p=635</guid>
<description><![CDATA[Macrovision has shipped a fix for a gaping hole in its SafeDisc (secdrv.sys) copy protection software, belatedly blocking an in-the-wild malware attack. The Macrovision patch (.zip file) comes a full 20 days after researchers at Symantec spotted a zero-day attack exploiting this vulnerability. Immediately after Symantec went public with the discovery, exploit code (.zip file) for the issue was published on the Internet. Functional exploit is commercially available through the CORE IMPACT and Immunity Canvas penetration testing platforms. Microsoft also issued a formal security advisory with a strong recommendation for Windows XP and Windows Server 3003 users to apply the Macrovision update. I'd told that Microsoft plans to roll out the fix automatically to Windows users on Patch Tuesday (November 13). ]]>
</description></item>
<item>
<title>Macrovision patches patch-delivery tool, leaves DRM zero-day wide open</title>
<link>http://blogs.zdnet.com/security/?p=625</link>
<pubDate>Wed, 31 Oct 2007 01:36:49 -0700</pubDate>
<dc:creator>Ryan Naraine</dc:creator>
<guid>http://blogs.zdnet.com/security/?p=625</guid>
<description><![CDATA[Macrovision today released a patch for a very severe vulnerability in the  FLEXnet Connect (InstallShield) patch-delivery offering but there's still no word on a fix for a zero-day attack vector in the company's Safedisc DRM application. FLEXnet Connect, which lets users electronically deliver applications, patches, updates, and messages directly to third-party systems, has been updated to correct an ActiveX issue that could lead to code execution attacks. [ SEE: Zero-day flaw in Macrovision DRM app under attack ] A warning from iDefense spells out the risk scenario: Exploitation allows attackers to execute arbitrary code with the privileges of the currently logged-in user. In order for exploitation to occur, users would be required to have a vulnerable version of the software installed and be ... ]]>
</description></item>
<item>
<title>Blu-ray BD+ copy protection defeated?</title>
<link>http://blogs.zdnet.com/hardware/?p=892</link>
<pubDate>Tue, 30 Oct 2007 04:08:22 -0700</pubDate>
<dc:creator>Adrian Kingsley-Hughes</dc:creator>
<guid>http://blogs.zdnet.com/hardware/?p=892</guid>
<description><![CDATA[Has the Blu-ray BD+ copy protection mechanism been defeated?  This press release by SlySoft seems to indicate that it has: AnyDVD goes AACS MKBv4 SlySoft was recently honoured by AACS-LA, being declared as public enemy number one in the ongoing battle for copyright protection. To prove them right and to take on the challenge, SlySoft has just released the latest AnyDVD version which beats the latest 4th generation HD-DVD and BluRay copy protection MKBv4, which was expected to be unbreakable. All that AACS-LA has to offer now is BD+, but even that is on the verge of being circumvented and a release is expected by the end of this year. James Wong, Head of development at SlySoft: "We already found a way to ... ]]>
</description></item>
<item>
<title>The RIAA versus us: a file-sharing standoff</title>
<link>http://blogs.zdnet.com/Bott/?p=319</link>
<pubDate>Fri, 19 Oct 2007 08:25:12 -0700</pubDate>
<dc:creator>Ed Bott</dc:creator>
<guid>http://blogs.zdnet.com/Bott/?p=319</guid>
<description><![CDATA[After reading through hundreds of comments to last week's digital media ethics poll, I've come to the realization that my readers are much more rational and reasonable than the entertainment industry. Overall, I see plenty of common sense in those responses, including a clear respect for property rights and an insistence on a reasonable approach to personal use, one that's consistent with centuries of historical precedent. Earlier this week, I looked at the enormous disconnect between what consumers see as their personal right to use purchased digital media and what the industry thinks those rights should be. To see another gaping chasm in attitudes, look at these answers from the same poll. More than 8,000 votes were cast on each of ... ]]>
</description></item>
<item>
<title>When is it OK to copy digital media?</title>
<link>http://blogs.zdnet.com/Bott/?p=317</link>
<pubDate>Fri, 12 Oct 2007 04:43:41 -0700</pubDate>
<dc:creator>Ed Bott</dc:creator>
<guid>http://blogs.zdnet.com/Bott/?p=317</guid>
<description><![CDATA[The response so far to my digital media ethics poll has been overwhelming. More than 7,500 votes have been cast so far, with nearly 500 comments posted in the Talkback sections for the introductory post and the poll itself. I plan to keep the voting open at least through the end of the weekend. So if you haven't voted yet, do it soon. Here's a summary of the results so far, followed by some preliminary analysis: The overwhelming majority (96%) think that buying a CD and making a copy for personal use is OK. But 40% think that some types of copies are more acceptable than others. I'm sifting through the comments to see if I can refine that conclusion. Vote or ... ]]>
</description></item>
<item>
<title>Where do you stand on digital media ethics?</title>
<link>http://blogs.zdnet.com/Bott/?p=314</link>
<pubDate>Tue, 09 Oct 2007 11:02:27 -0700</pubDate>
<dc:creator>Ed Bott</dc:creator>
<guid>http://blogs.zdnet.com/Bott/?p=314</guid>
<description><![CDATA[I'm back from vacation, digging through a pile of e-mail and snail mail and more packages than FedEx and UPS and USPS and I care to count. Anyway, while I try to find my desk under this mountain of paper and stuff, help me wrestle with some ethical questions related to digital media. We can all agree, I think, that it's easy to make perfect copies of digital media, and that there's no such thing as an unbreakable copy protection scheme. But the fact that you can do something doesn't necessarily mean you should. Does it? I'm not asking about criminal law or civil suits or the genuine evilness of DRM or the RIAA or Apple or Microsoft. For the sake ... ]]>
</description></item>
<item>
<title>Everything you've read about Vista DRM is wrong (Part 2)</title>
<link>http://blogs.zdnet.com/Bott/?p=304</link>
<pubDate>Tue, 18 Sep 2007 10:44:02 -0700</pubDate>
<dc:creator>Ed Bott</dc:creator>
<guid>http://blogs.zdnet.com/Bott/?p=304</guid>
<description><![CDATA[Windows Vista includes a new set of features that allow playback software to work with protected media. This DRM infrastructure is bitterly controversial, and it's given rise to an enormous amount of misinformation. No one has been more active (or successful) in spreading FUD and misinformation about this technology than Peter Gutmann, a researcher from the University of Auckland in New Zealand.    In Part 1 of this three-part series, I discussed some of the technical errors in Gutmann's paper that illustrate his lack of hands-on experience with the technology he's trying to cover and his fundamental confusion over how Windows Vista content protection features work. (You'll find more examples in Part 3.) If you think I'm nitpicking over these details, you ... ]]>
</description></item>
<item>
<title>Everything you've read about Vista DRM is wrong (Part 1)</title>
<link>http://blogs.zdnet.com/Bott/?p=299</link>
<pubDate>Sun, 16 Sep 2007 04:29:36 -0700</pubDate>
<dc:creator>Ed Bott</dc:creator>
<guid>http://blogs.zdnet.com/Bott/?p=299</guid>
<description><![CDATA[Last month, I wrote about the FUD surrounding Windows Vista and DRM. The FUDmaster is Peter Gutmann, a New Zealand researcher who wrote a paper last December that made a series of outrageous and inflammatory claims about Windows Vista. Since then, Gutmann has expanded the paper to more than four times its original size. The current version available on Gutmann's website clocks in at more than 26,000 words, making it longer than some recent works of fiction.    And length isn't the only thing Gutmann's paper has in common with the average pulp novel. Gutmann's work is riddled with factual errors, mistaken assumptions and unproven assertions, distortions, contradictions, misquotes, and outright untruths. In short, it's a work of fiction all on its ... ]]>
</description></item>
<item>
<title>More on HD, DRM, and CPU usage</title>
<link>http://blogs.zdnet.com/Bott/?p=298</link>
<pubDate>Sat, 08 Sep 2007 03:53:53 -0700</pubDate>
<dc:creator>Ed Bott</dc:creator>
<guid>http://blogs.zdnet.com/Bott/?p=298</guid>
<description><![CDATA[This is a very quick follow-up to my previous post documenting my experience with HD DVD and Blu-ray playback on Windows Vista. (If you haven't been following this story, you'll want to read that post and its predecessor, Blu-ray, HD DVD, and Vista to get the proper background.) DRM doom-and-gloomers have tried their best to scare you into thinking that you'll need to scrap your older monitors, video cards, and even HDTVs to play back HD content. They're wrong, as I was able to demonstrate with a two-buck VGA cable.    In the Talkback section, several commenters expressed skepticism over my contention that Windows Vista's DRM didn't come into play at all. Here's one typical comment:  You said that Vista's DRM was not ... ]]>
</description></item>
<item>
<title>A Blu-ray / HD DVD update</title>
<link>http://blogs.zdnet.com/Bott/?p=294</link>
<pubDate>Thu, 06 Sep 2007 03:13:27 -0700</pubDate>
<dc:creator>Ed Bott</dc:creator>
<guid>http://blogs.zdnet.com/Bott/?p=294</guid>
<description><![CDATA[Last week I listed the six essential hardware and software pieces you need to successfully play back a commercially produced high-definition disk in either the Blu-ray or HD DVD format. Over the weekend I had a chance to put both formats to the test. Setup took minutes, and the results were literally breathtaking. Oh, and despite the dire predictions of DRM doom-and-gloomers, I didn't have to deal with Vista's DRM at all. (Yes, you read that right: no Vista DRM. Keep reading for the details.)    I didn't bother trying to play back either disk on my living room Media Center machine - because its video card doesn't support HDCP, I knew the effort would have been pointless. (I've arranged to get ... ]]>
</description></item>
<item>
<title>Can Microsoft ever stop kernel tampering in Vista?</title>
<link>http://blogs.zdnet.com/security/?p=447</link>
<pubDate>Tue, 21 Aug 2007 01:21:37 -0700</pubDate>
<dc:creator>Ryan Naraine</dc:creator>
<guid>http://blogs.zdnet.com/security/?p=447</guid>
<description><![CDATA[I was just going through the slides from Joanna Rutkowska's Black Hat talk (127-page .ppt file) and discovered that there's another unpatched driver flaw that exposes Windows Vista to kernel tampering.    This flaw, in NVIDIA nTune, is similar to the recent ATI Technologies driver issue that provides a foolproof way to load unsigned drivers onto Vista -- defeating one of the new security mechanisms built into Microsoft's newest operating system.        Because the buggy driver is legitimately signed, Vista will always load it, setting up a scenario where an attacker can bring the driver to the target machine, install it and then exploit it.    [ SEE: ATI driver flaw exposes Vista kernel to attackers ]    Even in cases where all device drivers are perfect (we ... ]]>
</description></item>
<item>
<title>Wal-Mart hops on anti-DRM bandwagon</title>
<link>http://blogs.zdnet.com/BTL/?p=5999</link>
<pubDate>Tue, 21 Aug 2007 05:33:46 -0700</pubDate>
<dc:creator>Larry Dignan</dc:creator>
<guid>http://blogs.zdnet.com/BTL/?p=5999</guid>
<description><![CDATA[Wal-Mart is going DRM free too.    Wal-Mart said in a statement that it will offer DRM-free music for 94 cents a track from record labels such as Universal and EMI Music.    Universal was the latest to go DRM free and EMI made the move months ago.    With a huge music retailer like Wal-Mart lined up against DRM it's likely other outlets and labels will fall in line. Soon DRM will be a music liability.    Wal-Mart noted that it will continue to offer its WMA-format music downloads. The DRM-free downloads will be at 256 kbps for 94 cents a track. WMA downloads will run 88 cents a track for a 128 kbps version. ]]>
</description></item>
<item>
<title>&quot;Baked-in&quot; DRM - Yet another reason for people to hate Microsoft</title>
<link>http://blogs.zdnet.com/hardware/?p=696</link>
<pubDate>Mon, 20 Aug 2007 02:05:36 -0700</pubDate>
<dc:creator>Adrian Kingsley-Hughes</dc:creator>
<guid>http://blogs.zdnet.com/hardware/?p=696</guid>
<description><![CDATA[Newsflash     There   s a growing segment of computer users that hate Microsoft.     Baked-in    DRM is giving more users a reason to hate Microsoft.    Over the weekend I spent some time catching up on the great Gutmann Vista DRM debate (in the red corner we have Peter Gutmann, while in the blue corner we have George Ou and Ed Bott     if you want the background to this story follow these links, but not before you   ve put a If you   re firmly opposed to DRM then paying Microsoft to add it to your software is a bit like an animal lover finding out that they   ve paid to have a baby seal clubbed on their behalfpot of coffee on, drunk it and then ... ]]>
</description></item>
<item>
<title>DRM: The hearse is right on schedule</title>
<link>http://blogs.zdnet.com/BTL/?p=5923</link>
<pubDate>Fri, 10 Aug 2007 08:58:09 -0700</pubDate>
<dc:creator>Larry Dignan</dc:creator>
<guid>http://blogs.zdnet.com/BTL/?p=5923</guid>
<description><![CDATA[Universal Music Group on Friday said that it will sell "thousands of its albums and tracks" without DRM for a limited time.   Universal said in a statement that its test will run from August and January and track "consumer demand, price sensitivity and piracy in regards to the availability of open MP3s." And then when Universal finds that demand increases it'll ditch DRM permanently (I added that last part).    But the writing is on the album cover (more on Techmeme). EMI is already doing the DRM-free dance. And others will follow. Sure Apple CEO Steve Jobs may have prodded things a little but DRM's days are limited.   If the Universal and EMI experiments go well--and they probably will--other labels will view ... ]]>
</description></item>
<item>
<title>DRM and open source are the great divide</title>
<link>http://blogs.zdnet.com/open-source/?p=1217</link>
<pubDate>Mon, 16 Jul 2007 10:43:25 -0700</pubDate>
<dc:creator>Dana Blankenhorn</dc:creator>
<guid>http://blogs.zdnet.com/open-source/?p=1217</guid>
<description><![CDATA[If there is any word other than Microsoft which can get an argument going among open source advocates, it is DRM. (The t-shirt is available here.)    DRM, Digital Rights Management, is generally found in the form of an encryption wrapper giving control of the content to a rights holder. DRM is designed to keep content from being viewed or forwarded "without the express written permission" of its creator.    DRM is at the heart of the BBC iPlayer story. It is at the heart of Apple's iTunes monopoly. It is the centerpiece of the Copyright Wars. And it is the issue which threatens to split the GPL into two camps, the GPLv2 camp of Linus Torvalds and the GPLv3 camp of Richard Stallman.    Do ... ]]>
</description></item>
<item>
<title>The iPhone might never be free of AT&amp;T</title>
<link>http://blogs.zdnet.com/hardware/?p=588</link>
<pubDate>Thu, 05 Jul 2007 05:16:53 -0700</pubDate>
<dc:creator>Adrian Kingsley-Hughes</dc:creator>
<guid>http://blogs.zdnet.com/hardware/?p=588</guid>
<description><![CDATA[I've been taking a look around the web at the efforts by hackers to free the iPhone from the AT&T shackles so that it could be used as an iPod or with other network providers, both in the US and abroad.  I've come to the conclusion that while it might be possible to unlock the iPhone, it'll never be truly free of AT&T.  Here's why.    For each new AT&T customer that signs up, Apple gets a cut. It's the gift that keeps on giving.The iPhone has changed how cellphones are sold, and when you look closely at the implications of this change, you'll see that it's not for the better.  So far the model that we've seen is ... ]]>
</description></item>
<item>
<title>iTunes Plus - Getting more than you bargained for!</title>
<link>http://blogs.zdnet.com/hardware/?p=474</link>
<pubDate>Mon, 04 Jun 2007 08:53:58 -0700</pubDate>
<dc:creator>Adrian Kingsley-Hughes</dc:creator>
<guid>http://blogs.zdnet.com/hardware/?p=474</guid>
<description><![CDATA[Following article on Wired and The Unofficial Apple Weblog, debate is raging as to whether it is right that Apple incorporates user   s iTunes user name into tracks (specifically, the DRM-free iTunes Plus tunes).    I   ve read dozens of blog posts and web articles today on this subject and one thing that seems absent is a sensible look as to why people might be bothered by this.  The label that seems to be being applied those who are concerned about this information being incorporated into tracks is    file-sharer.     But to be honest I don   t think you need to be a file-sharer that   s ready to upload their entire iTunes Plus library to P2P to be concerned that this information could land you ... ]]>
</description></item>
<item>
<title>iTunes Plus tracks contain user info</title>
<link>http://blogs.zdnet.com/Apple/?p=570</link>
<pubDate>Mon, 04 Jun 2007 05:50:55 -0700</pubDate>
<dc:creator>Jason D. O'Grady</dc:creator>
<guid>http://blogs.zdnet.com/Apple/?p=570</guid>
<description><![CDATA[People that were hoping to be able to freely trade iTunes' new DRM-free tracks from EMI will be in for a surprise     the tracks are embedded with your iTunes user name. TUAW has posted a grep command that allows you to view the user name tag via terminal. Wired's Epicenter blog claims that you can see it by selecting "Get Info" on a track (although this doesn't work for me).    Some people posting in the comments of various social news sites are in a rub over Apple's inclusion of their iTunes user name in the tracks but I don't understand why. Apple said that the tracks were "DRM-free" not "personal identifier free." The tracks are no longer restricted, you can ... ]]>
</description></item>
<item>
<title>EMI: DRM assassin</title>
<link>http://blogs.zdnet.com/BTL/?p=5232</link>
<pubDate>Thu, 31 May 2007 12:45:48 -0700</pubDate>
<dc:creator>Larry Dignan</dc:creator>
<guid>http://blogs.zdnet.com/BTL/?p=5232</guid>
<description><![CDATA[When the obituary of digital rights management (DRM) software is written music label EMI is going to get a fairly meaty chapter.    First, EMI delivers its catalog DRM-free on iTunes. And now it's counting YouTube as a dance partner. In the music industry, EMI is the equivalent of scab that just won't go along with the union. EMI can make DRM a thing of the past--all it has to do now is show its financial results won't crater.    As for the YouTube deal, EMI says in a statement that it will give YouTube users "unprecedented access to authorized videos and recordings from EMI Music artists, including those featured in user generated content."    YouTube now notes that all four major music labels are now ... ]]>
</description></item>
</channel>
</rss>
