Slashdot Log In
BluWiki Seeks iPodHash Author, Hopes for Help From EFF
Posted by
timothy
on Sat Nov 22, 2008 09:27 PM
from the have-you-seen-this-guy? dept.
from the have-you-seen-this-guy? dept.
Sam Odio, who runs the BluWiki mentioned the other day as host of the iPodHash project, has posted a followup on the legal tussle in which Apple has engaged the iPodHash project for attempting to reverse-engineer the hash used to encrypt the iTunesDB in recent iPods. He writes in that post:
"I've received a flood of emails from interested individuals who want to help. Most importantly, I was contacted by Fred von Lohmann from the EFF. They're currently evaluating whether they will represent us against any potential Apple litigation. This would be great, because it will enable BluWiki to continue to host the project while working with EFF to address Apple's concerns.
However, before the EFF commits to representing us against Apple, they want to speak to the author of the [iPodHash] project. I'm posting this public plea hoping that the author, or someone who knows the author, might read it." Update: 11/23 04:25 GMT by T : Due to a shortage of brain cells, I flipped the actors here as this post was originally rendered: To be clear, Sam Odio of BluWiki is seeking the person behind the iPodHash project, not the other way around. Mea culpa.
Related Stories
[+]
Apple DMCAs iPodHash Project 453 comments
TRS-80 writes "Apple has sent a DMCA takedown notice to the IpodHash project, claiming it circumvents their FairPlay DRM scheme. Some background: Apple first added a hash to the iTunesDB file in 6th-gen iPods, but it was quickly reverse-engineered. They changed it with the release of iPhone 2.0 and a project was started to reverse the new hash, but wasn't successful yet. My guess is Apple used the same algorithm as FairPlay for the new hash, so Apple could use the DMCA to prevent competing apps like Songbird and Banshee from talking to iPods/iPhones. BTW, don't tell Apple, but the project uses a wiki, so the old page versions from before the takedown are still there."
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
I hope they win (Score:2, Insightful)
I hope they win. I am currently avoiding iTunes like the plague it is on windows. Resource hungry and shoves new software at you all the time
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Due to the stuff apple has done with the hashing of files (what this project was trying to break), Amarok now eats your music collection on the latest generation of iPods.
Or rather, after any interaction with amarok the iPod refuses to recognise the contents of its own disc.
Apple suck.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Or was it introduced in a firmware/software update? If it was in an update I'm sure she doesn't have it, and neither would I since we don't use iTunes in the first place.
But if that were all it is, a custom firmware that is just the original or slightly modified could be used to revert. I would think.
Re: (Score:2)
If you are looking for something like an MP3 player, an interesting one I got recently is the Slacker G2 [slacker.com].
It doesn't interact with my Ubuntu computer at all, and only works with Windows computers for transferring songs.
But, it will automatically download songs over wifi based on stations I add to it through the Slacker.com website, and then it keeps track of what I played, what I like and don't like, and will change the songs automatically based on that. The free serv
Re:I hope they win (Score:4, Insightful)
that sounds pretty cool actually (and doesn't look half bad either). though i'm still waiting for public wireless internet access to gain more widespread adoption so we can start seeing true wireless internet radios. i was sorta hoping Last.fm would come out with a portable media player. they're more indie friendly, and their recommendation system and just the overall site interface are both really well designed.
in any case, Apple is really demonstrating how screwed up our legal system is, and particularly the abuse of the DMCA by corporate juggernauts like themselves. guilt and innocence don't even matter in such lopsided match ups. this kind of corporate bullying not only shows the ugly side of the legal system, but also the ugly side of Apple.
if such actions are tolerated by consumers, then we'll continue to see consumer rights being eroded to the point that we'll need the express permission of Apple/Sony/Microsoft/Nintendo/et al. just to turn on the devices we've purchased. if breaking the DMCA is the only way to create software that's interoperable with the iPod, then Apple can take their DMCA notice and shove it.
Apple has a near monopoly on PMPs, and they're now abusing their market dominance to gain an unfair monopoly on the desktop music player/media manager market as well. DMCA or no DMCA, you can't use one monopoly to muscle out your competitors in another market. this is clearly anti-competitive behavior. Apple doesn't need to publish the specifications to their proprietary hardware/software, but they shouldn't be allowed to suppress other people's attempts to reverse-engineer those specs.
Parent
Re:I hope they win (Score:5, Insightful)
You mean like this [amazon.com], although the reviews seem to be poor.
There are internet clock radios, and this one [amazon.com] even has Slacker.
As for the rest of your comment: yeah. The DMCA is a bad law.
Ideally if DRM was protected by law, the consumers should be protected as well. Free replacement discs since backups aren't allowed. Guaranteed money back if the activation servers go offline, or a DRM free version. A DRM free version of the media in escrow for when(if?) the media goes into public domain. If the media is tied to a piece of hardware, free replacement if that hardware is broken or no longer functional. Free upgrades in media, like DVD to Blu-Ray, since you can't copy stuff.
And so on.
Parent
Why? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
iTunes predates the iPod.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Because it makes it harder for Apple to control the user and to keep product bugs to a minimum.
By bundling all of the steps into their own products they don't have to address bugs such as:
*Internet Explorer not being secure enough to access the store
*Operating System not handling Mass Storage correctly
and other bugs that are, honestly, not their problem.
I am as much against the evil empire as anyone else, but they have their reasons for covering their butts and bundling all their eggs together. Honestly tho
Re:Why? (Score:4, Insightful)
You can enable disk mode on the ipod, and just drag and drop stuff onto it, but you can't put music on it that way for the iPod to play. They do this so you can't 'easily' (for a casual iPod user) just load up your ipod, take it to someone else's computer, and give them a copy of all your music.
Of course, this hasn't stopped anyone who really wants to do that, since free software exists to copy playlists, and tracks off of the ipod onto your pc without using iTunes exist. But it stops 'regular' iPod users from just sharing all their music everywhere.
Stopping that, is the reason that they tie your iPod to an itunes account, and why they obfuscate the music you put on the ipod with iTunes.
Other than that though, it conforms to the mass storage device.
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
while your correct whats the difference If I carry an 8 gig SD card with me and leave the songs I want with my friends anyways?
Actually I know the difference apple isn't trying to stop that part, only to stop from being sued by stupid record labels trying to enforce an old business model on new hardware.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
The way iTunes stores the songs on the iPod also makes for more efficient searches (for the iPod). Less unnecessary harddrive spinning means longer playtimes.
I'm kidding of course, Apple just wanted to piss off all the anal-retentive types that are still living in the 90's and want to name every song by hand and put each song individually into a specially crafted folder. MP3s just don't sound right without that personal touch.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
but really none of this is news, its all part of how DRM is designed to make sure customers use their hardware exactly how they want them to and no other way. At the expense of sounding like a broken record, DRM simply is defective by design in that they expect people to buy these devices yet never truly own them.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
I actually have to disagree. The way Apple does it is brilliant for keeping things organised on the iPod. Before getting an iPod, I had a generic MP3 player that did simply function as a USB mass storage device... and I hated it. Sure, it's possible to keep a music collection organised the old-fashioned way, but the iTunes way is easier.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The iPod works just fine as a mass storage block device. And when you transfer media files to it I assure that it's using that interface.
But if you own more than a few hundred media files you'll quickly find that organization by folder is inefficient if not totally unmanageable, and iTunes is designed to address that issue.
It would be nice if the iPod could work both with unindexed and indexed media files -- certainly the additional flexibility and compatibility would be nice -- but it's folly to pretend th
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Because the iPod does more than just play mp3 files off a harddrive. It keeps files organized by metadata, it does smart playlists, and it keeps track of play counts, and it syncs all that with iTunes.
WHOIS info for bluwiki.org (Score:3, Funny)
Registrant Name:Sam Odio
Registrant Organization:OdioWorks, LLC
Registrant Street1:14525 SW Millikan
Registrant Street2:#39248
Registrant Street3:
Registrant City:Beaverton
Registrant State/Province:OR
Registrant Postal Code:97005
Registrant Country:US
Registrant Phone:+1.7037772727
If you want something done...
Nice try... (Score:3, Insightful)
Due to a typo in the article and the /. headline, you have located the guy who wrote the article. Great job, sherlock. Now find the author of IpodHash.
Summary is wrong! BluWiki seeks iPodHash author (Score:2, Informative)
Sheash. It is so hard to RTFA now?
The iPodHash project is (was) hosted by BluWiki, and Apple's lawyers have contacted BluWiki with the takedown notice.
It's BluWiki who are looking for the iPodHash guys, because the EFF wants to help represent them.
to save you clicking through:
"Plea to the author of IpodHash:
Please contact Fred at the EFF. Fred is looking to protect your right to free speech online. But he can't do so if we don't work with him. Because Fred has expressed interest in representing both you an
Summary is wrong. (Score:5, Informative)
Sam Odio runs BluWiki and he is seeking the author of ipodHash.
Plea to the author of IpodHash:
Please contact Fred at the EFF. Fred is looking to protect your right to free speech online. But he can't do so if we don't work with him. Because Fred has expressed interest in representing both you and BluWiki, all communication is confidential and protected under the attorney-client privilege. Communication with Fred can not be released in court.
If you do not contact Fred, and the EFF does not represent us, we will be forced to comply with all of Apple's demands. If Apple chooses to litigate against us, we will probably exhaust all funds in our defense. Out of money, BluWiki could ultimately be forced offline. This would be one more small step backwards in the fight for the right to free speech.
Fred's phone number is +1 415 436 9333 x123 and his email is fred@eff.org. You can find his PGP key here.
I sincerely hope that you contact the EFF so that we can restore this project and work with Apple in a way that does not violate BluWiki's founding principle: giving everyone the tools to express themselves online without censorship.
posted by Sam Odio at 2:06 PM
Re:Summary is wrong. (Score:4, Interesting)
You're right, and my apologies -- I've corrected / updated the story, which will take a few minutes to update in the database. In a moment of fuzziness, I expanded on what I think is a typo in Odio's post ("However, before the EFF commits to representing us against Apple, they want to speak to the author of the BluWiki project. I'm posting this public plea hoping that the author, or someone who knows the author, might read it.") and reversed the players based on that.
timothy
Parent
Re:Summary is wrong. (Score:4, Funny)
Parent
Remember your crypto (Score:5, Funny)
Sam Odio of BluWiki is seeking the person behind the iPodHash project
It is a property of every good hash implementation that it's difficult or impossible to determine the source that generated the hash.