| |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
A ruling in the bnetd DMCA caseA ruling in the bnetd DMCA casePosted Oct 4, 2004 3:53 UTC (Mon) by dvdeug (subscriber, #10998)In reply to: A ruling in the bnetd DMCA case by dvrabel Parent article: A ruling in the bnetd DMCA case
They can't; Blizzard wouldn't tell them how.
(Log in to post comments)
Oh, well, time to play a different game Posted Oct 4, 2004 4:46 UTC (Mon) by leonbrooks (guest, #1494) [Link] Vote with your dollars, maybe then they'll lighten up.
Oh, well, time to play a different game Posted Oct 6, 2004 3:58 UTC (Wed) by rusty (✭ supporter ✭, #26) [Link] > Vote with your dollars, maybe then they'll lighten up.
I don't think so: they're owned by Vivendi. Vivendi would happily bury Blizzard if it strengthened the DMCA.
A ruling in the bnetd DMCA case Posted Oct 4, 2004 13:08 UTC (Mon) by arafel (subscriber, #18557) [Link] Which is actually not that surprising - including code to verify CD keys would be a help for people mass-generating keys...
(Note that this doesn't mean I think the ruling is any less moronic.)
A ruling in the bnetd DMCA case Posted Oct 4, 2004 14:23 UTC (Mon) by French_Guest (guest, #16946) [Link] Wrong. Did you ever hear of assymetric encryption (RSA, etc...) ? A CD key could be implemented as a digital document signature, for example.
But with source, the server owner could simply change the code and recompile it to disable such checks... ;-)
A ruling in the bnetd DMCA case Posted Oct 4, 2004 17:58 UTC (Mon) by flewellyn (subscriber, #5047) [Link] Yes, but you're assuming that they did anything that sane. Remember the Elcomsoft case? The encryption that Adobe went to court to defend was a piss-poor implementation of the Caesar shift cypher.
Basically, we're seeing companies use the courts to do the job that should go to real cryptographers.
A ruling in the bnetd DMCA case Posted Oct 5, 2004 8:24 UTC (Tue) by khim (subscriber, #9252) [Link] Unfortunatelly you can not create short activation code this way (short here is 12-24 characters i.e. 72-144bits: enough for symmertic encryption, way too small for assymetric).
A ruling in the bnetd DMCA case Posted Oct 4, 2004 17:12 UTC (Mon) by arafel (subscriber, #18557) [Link] It could be - but did they? :-) If it's just done as a simple checksum, or XOR/checksum etc. then it becomes much much faster to find valid keys. It depends how they did it in the first place.
And, as you said - with the source code available people would just remove it anyway. So it's kind of moot anyway.
|
|
||||||||||||