I agree there have been issues with BD+ however it appears from the whitepaper to be a relatively simple runtime so perhaps it just boils down to inadequate QA and testing by certain manufacturers of equipment and discs. BD+ did appear quite abruptly and some machines that appeared before it did clearly hadn't had sufficient testing.
I think HD DVD was doomed for a number of things it fundamentally screwed up on. AACS wasn't much stronger than CSS and it was vulnerable to a class break as indeed happened. Doom9 had it cracked in no time, thanks in no part to sloppy volume key encryption and playback software. BD+ is crackable on a per disk basis but it isn't vulnerable to a class break - every new disk, or even batches of disks can use a different scheme to protect the key and AACS is relegated to key management. Secondly region free encoding is a consumer pleaser but some studios hate it.
From reading the whitepaper it seems the implementors of BD+ had their heads screwed on. They are realistic in accepting that every scheme is breakable given a determined adversary so instead their scheme relies on being renewable. Every disk, indeed even batches of disks could use a different scheme and it takes enormous effort to break every single disk.
This is why its nuts to think BD+ is cracked. It isn't. It would be more realistic to say BD+ on disk X is cracked, but with 40, 50, 60, 100 disks appearing month after month, the effort to crack them all will be overwhelming. AnyDVD is going to have to cherry pick what movies to work on because there is no chance it will work on all of them.
“An engineer explained to us that hundreds of ear impressions were gathered in the name of research, and while each one obviously boasted its own unique shape and size, one single characteristic remained uniform across the board: the entrance into the ear canal is not a perfect circle, it's an oval.”
Now that we've thrown 'em off the trail, use the form below to get in touch with the people at Engadget. Please fill in all of the required fields because they're required.
I agree there have been issues with BD+ however it appears from the whitepaper to be a relatively simple runtime so perhaps it just boils down to inadequate QA and testing by certain manufacturers of equipment and discs. BD+ did appear quite abruptly and some machines that appeared before it did clearly hadn't had sufficient testing.
I think HD DVD was doomed for a number of things it fundamentally screwed up on. AACS wasn't much stronger than CSS and it was vulnerable to a class break as indeed happened. Doom9 had it cracked in no time, thanks in no part to sloppy volume key encryption and playback software. BD+ is crackable on a per disk basis but it isn't vulnerable to a class break - every new disk, or even batches of disks can use a different scheme to protect the key and AACS is relegated to key management. Secondly region free encoding is a consumer pleaser but some studios hate it.
From reading the whitepaper it seems the implementors of BD+ had their heads screwed on. They are realistic in accepting that every scheme is breakable given a determined adversary so instead their scheme relies on being renewable. Every disk, indeed even batches of disks could use a different scheme and it takes enormous effort to break every single disk.
This is why its nuts to think BD+ is cracked. It isn't. It would be more realistic to say BD+ on disk X is cracked, but with 40, 50, 60, 100 disks appearing month after month, the effort to crack them all will be overwhelming. AnyDVD is going to have to cherry pick what movies to work on because there is no chance it will work on all of them.