The issue in Japan [LWN.net]

The issue in Japan

Posted Apr 25, 2005 22:53 UTC (Mon) by Ross (subscriber, #4065)
In reply to: The issue in Japan by brouhaha
Parent article: Eben Moglen's linux.conf.au keynote

And don't forget that all equipment must obey the broadcast flag starting
this summer. Not only that, but it must prevent users from bypassing it
with safeguards which are non-trivial to bypass. That's probably just not
possible in a tool which is distributed as source code. I don't know if
Japan has the equivalent of the broadcast flag but it is likely since it was
required to be legislated in international treaties.

(Log in to post comments)

The issue in Japan

Posted Apr 26, 2005 0:20 UTC (Tue) by dberkholz (subscriber, #23346) [Link]

It could be. If you need to crack a generated 2048-bit key or something crazy like that.

The issue in Japan

Posted Apr 26, 2005 1:06 UTC (Tue) by Ross (subscriber, #4065) [Link]

I don't see how. Just modify the code to skip the authentication routine.
It's the same problem as any client-side authentication. It doesn't actually
do anything. It's just a speedbump. It would be a bigger speedbump if it
was binary-only, but still not real security.

Broadcast Flag

Posted Apr 26, 2005 5:38 UTC (Tue) by Ross (subscriber, #4065) [Link]

Sorry to reply to myself, but here's an interesting interview with the
founder of pcHDTV (the only Linux-only HDTV capture card) which discusses a
few of the requirements of the broadcast flag:

http://digitalmedia.oreilly.com/2005/04/20/pctv.html

As you can see there is no way a software implementation, especially an
open source one, could meet the requirements.

Broadcast flag not /quite/ activated ... yet

Posted Apr 26, 2005 17:58 UTC (Tue) by Max.Hyre (subscriber, #1054) [Link]

Broadcast flag not /quite/ activated, yet

The broadcast flag is being challenged in court, mostly under the belief that the FCC has no damn' business regulating hardware. Their charter is to regulate use of the airwaves, and how one accesses such use is beyond their pale.

The suit is being driven (if I have it right) by Public Knowledge, a ``Washington DC based advocacy group working to defend your rights in the emerging digital culture''. Their report, in brief, is that the matter is currently in the U.S. District Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, and the court requested a second round of argument (unusual, I believe). The additional briefs were presented early this month, and everyone's holding their breath.