By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming Discussion - PS3 Hacker Raised All the Legal Funds Needed to Beat Sony in a Weekend

Spankey said:
fordy said:
Spankey said:
fordy said:
KylieDog said:
 


What he has done is the same as if he bought a movie on DVD.  That DVD is his to do what he wants with it but the film on the DVD does not belong to him is belongs to the makers, so when he starts posting the film for everyone to see he screwed up.  This is no different.


I wish people could get their facts straight.

A movie is an artwork. Artwork can be copyrighted.

A master key is a binary INTEGER. Integers cannot be copyrighted.


Oddly, product identification codes such as ISBN numbers and UPC barcode numbers can be protected, at least in the US

http://www.gs1us.org/barcodes_and_ecom/i_need_a_u.p.c._barcode?utm_campaign=InternalCampaign&utm_source=Home&utm_medium=QuickLinks&utm_content=Barcode

http://www.isbn.org/standards/home/index.asp

you are not allowed to generate your own and claim it's UPC's or ISBN's. that could be fraud depending on xyz. might apply to GeoHot here provided Sony can successfully claim that only they have the right to generate and distribute their security keys for their products and services.


UPCs and ISBNs are different. They need an independent governing body in order to prevent doubling up of codes. Nothing worse than the commercial sector being in disorder.

In the case of security keys, there is no governance thre. It's up to the key user to ensure the safety of their key.


UPCs and ISBNs are examples of numbers (or integers) which have been generated, distributed, and are protected against misuse, are they not? you claimed that no number could be afforded protection, obviously you were mistaken.

What the hell are you talking about? Just because a book has ISBN 12345, that doesnt mean I cannot use the number 12345 in any other application. That is a completely stupid and retarded stance!



Around the Network
thranx said:
Spankey said:


UPCs and ISBNs are examples of numbers (or integers) which have been generated, distributed, and are protected, are they not? you claimed that no number could be afforded protection, obviously you were mistaken.

any one can still use that string of numbers for anything they want. they are not copyrighted. But the controlling body of UPC and ISBN would not recognize them if they do not want to. Nothing to do with copyright.

 

this article talks about trying to copyright a number, and also of another similar case involving hd dvd.

http://ipnotions.com/2007/05/you-can-copyright-number-but-not-as.html

"Update: Lots of good coverage out there. Only one link to me, but them's the wages of sin. Or in this case the wages of toiling in obscurity. In any event, I found particularly heartening the coverage at EFF Deep Links, that makes clear that it is, in fact, an anti-circumvention claim, and not a copyright one."

I suggest people read it as it is somewhat similar to this case at hand, and sony isn't on the bad end of this one hd dvd was.


the situation here with numbers is that a person can't generate a number on their own and then say it came from UPC or ISBN's bodies. they can tattoo it on their genetalia or claim the number sequence is a sign of God but they are not allowed to pass off a number as someone elses -when it's clearly not - and then distibute the number and tell people how to make a fake number.

The the PS3's (and to some extent apparently the PSN) have been hacked to accept fakely generated keys as coming from Sony when they are clearly not. the method to generate fake keys and make PS3's accept them as coming from Sony has been distributed. I'm fairly sure that Sony will have some grounds for recourse, but again that's what the courts will decide.



Proud Sony Rear Admiral

fordy said:
Spankey said:
fordy said:
Spankey said:
fordy said:
KylieDog said:
 


What he has done is the same as if he bought a movie on DVD.  That DVD is his to do what he wants with it but the film on the DVD does not belong to him is belongs to the makers, so when he starts posting the film for everyone to see he screwed up.  This is no different.


I wish people could get their facts straight.

A movie is an artwork. Artwork can be copyrighted.

A master key is a binary INTEGER. Integers cannot be copyrighted.


Oddly, product identification codes such as ISBN numbers and UPC barcode numbers can be protected, at least in the US

http://www.gs1us.org/barcodes_and_ecom/i_need_a_u.p.c._barcode?utm_campaign=InternalCampaign&utm_source=Home&utm_medium=QuickLinks&utm_content=Barcode

http://www.isbn.org/standards/home/index.asp

you are not allowed to generate your own and claim it's UPC's or ISBN's. that could be fraud depending on xyz. might apply to GeoHot here provided Sony can successfully claim that only they have the right to generate and distribute their security keys for their products and services.


UPCs and ISBNs are different. They need an independent governing body in order to prevent doubling up of codes. Nothing worse than the commercial sector being in disorder.

In the case of security keys, there is no governance thre. It's up to the key user to ensure the safety of their key.


UPCs and ISBNs are examples of numbers (or integers) which have been generated, distributed, and are protected against misuse, are they not? you claimed that no number could be afforded protection, obviously you were mistaken.

What the hell are you talking about? Just because a book has ISBN 12345, that doesnt mean I cannot use the number 12345 in any other application. That is a completely stupid and retarded stance!


you are not reading what i'm writing.

you are not ISBN. You cannot claim you're ISBN and in a position to distribute ISBN numbers unless you are. Anything you distribute as having come from ISBN when it has not is wrong.

hopefully that's clear enough.



Proud Sony Rear Admiral

Spankey said:
fordy said:
Spankey said:
fordy said:
Spankey said:
fordy said:
KylieDog said:
 


What he has done is the same as if he bought a movie on DVD.  That DVD is his to do what he wants with it but the film on the DVD does not belong to him is belongs to the makers, so when he starts posting the film for everyone to see he screwed up.  This is no different.


I wish people could get their facts straight.

A movie is an artwork. Artwork can be copyrighted.

A master key is a binary INTEGER. Integers cannot be copyrighted.


Oddly, product identification codes such as ISBN numbers and UPC barcode numbers can be protected, at least in the US

http://www.gs1us.org/barcodes_and_ecom/i_need_a_u.p.c._barcode?utm_campaign=InternalCampaign&utm_source=Home&utm_medium=QuickLinks&utm_content=Barcode

http://www.isbn.org/standards/home/index.asp

you are not allowed to generate your own and claim it's UPC's or ISBN's. that could be fraud depending on xyz. might apply to GeoHot here provided Sony can successfully claim that only they have the right to generate and distribute their security keys for their products and services.


UPCs and ISBNs are different. They need an independent governing body in order to prevent doubling up of codes. Nothing worse than the commercial sector being in disorder.

In the case of security keys, there is no governance thre. It's up to the key user to ensure the safety of their key.


UPCs and ISBNs are examples of numbers (or integers) which have been generated, distributed, and are protected against misuse, are they not? you claimed that no number could be afforded protection, obviously you were mistaken.

What the hell are you talking about? Just because a book has ISBN 12345, that doesnt mean I cannot use the number 12345 in any other application. That is a completely stupid and retarded stance!


you are not reading what i'm writing.

you are not ISBN. You cannot claim you're ISBN and in a position to distribute ISBN numbers unless you are. Anything you distribute as having come from ISBN when it has not is wrong.

hopefully that's clear enough.

Yes, but I am allowed to cite an ISBN, just like any bookstore does, and just like GeoHot did to sign files.

He did not MAKE a key. He cited one. It's NOT illegal to cite an ISBN!



fordy said:
Spankey said:
fordy said:
Spankey said:
 


UPCs and ISBNs are examples of numbers (or integers) which have been generated, distributed, and are protected against misuse, are they not? you claimed that no number could be afforded protection, obviously you were mistaken.

What the hell are you talking about? Just because a book has ISBN 12345, that doesnt mean I cannot use the number 12345 in any other application. That is a completely stupid and retarded stance!


you are not reading what i'm writing.

you are not ISBN. You cannot claim you're ISBN and in a position to distribute ISBN numbers unless you are. Anything you distribute as having come from ISBN when it has not is wrong.

hopefully that's clear enough.

Yes, but I am allowed to cite an ISBN, just like any bookstore does, and just like GeoHot did to sign files.

He did not MAKE a key. He cited one. It's NOT illegal to cite an ISBN!

but you see, he cited one which can be attached to homebrew apps which are not developed, suported or distributed by Sony.

Putting a DKNY badge on a random cheapo wallet does not make it automatically a wallet made by DKNY if you see what I'm getting at.



Proud Sony Rear Admiral

Around the Network
Spankey said:
fordy said:
Spankey said:
fordy said:
Spankey said:
 


UPCs and ISBNs are examples of numbers (or integers) which have been generated, distributed, and are protected against misuse, are they not? you claimed that no number could be afforded protection, obviously you were mistaken.

What the hell are you talking about? Just because a book has ISBN 12345, that doesnt mean I cannot use the number 12345 in any other application. That is a completely stupid and retarded stance!


you are not reading what i'm writing.

you are not ISBN. You cannot claim you're ISBN and in a position to distribute ISBN numbers unless you are. Anything you distribute as having come from ISBN when it has not is wrong.

hopefully that's clear enough.

Yes, but I am allowed to cite an ISBN, just like any bookstore does, and just like GeoHot did to sign files.

He did not MAKE a key. He cited one. It's NOT illegal to cite an ISBN!

but you see, he cited one which can be attached to homebrew apps which are not developed, suported or distributed by Sony.

Putting a DKNY badge on a wallet does not make it automatically a wallet made by DKNY if you see what I'm getting at.

 

Except the only boundaries are whether the PS3 accepts it or not. Code signing is a simple mathematical equation if you CITE the number. Besdes your argument is flawed because Sony use the same key for everything, whereas ISBNs and UPCs require one code per product.

And for the record, there is talk about replacing the ISBNs with GUIDs, effectively dissolving the foundation to no more than just a checker for doubleups, so your argument doesn't hold up there, either.



fordy said:
Spankey said:

but you see, he cited one which can be attached to homebrew apps which are not developed, suported or distributed by Sony.

Putting a DKNY badge on a wallet does not make it automatically a wallet made by DKNY if you see what I'm getting at.

 

Except the only boundaries are whether the PS3 accepts it or not. Code signing is a simple mathematical equation if you CITE the number. Besdes your argument is flawed because Sony use the same key for everything, whereas ISBNs and UPCs require one code per product.

And for the record, there is talk about replacing the ISBNs with GUIDs, effectively dissolving the foundation to no more than just a checker for doubleups, so your argument doesn't hold up there, either.


you still don't get my point.

so what if Sony uses the same key to sign every piece of software they autherise?

The point is that GeoHot is not Sony and should have no right to sign something as coming from Sony when he is not Sony. he's flogging fake Sony goods to the PS3 and has told others how to do the same.

GUID is just another number generated and distributed by a protected system. Just like ISBN. There is or will be a controlling body who will assign the numbers. The same will hold true, you won't be allowed to generate a number privately and then claim it came from them, so i don't see how that's too different at all.



Proud Sony Rear Admiral

Spankey said:
fordy said:
Spankey said:
 

but you see, he cited one which can be attached to homebrew apps which are not developed, suported or distributed by Sony.

Putting a DKNY badge on a wallet does not make it automatically a wallet made by DKNY if you see what I'm getting at.

 

Except the only boundaries are whether the PS3 accepts it or not. Code signing is a simple mathematical equation if you CITE the number. Besdes your argument is flawed because Sony use the same key for everything, whereas ISBNs and UPCs require one code per product.

And for the record, there is talk about replacing the ISBNs with GUIDs, effectively dissolving the foundation to no more than just a checker for doubleups, so your argument doesn't hold up there, either.


you still don't get my point.

so what if Sony uses the same key to sign every piece of software they autherise?

The point is that GeoHot is not Sony and should have no right to sign something as coming from Sony when he is not Sony. he's flogging fake Sony goods to the PS3 and has told others how to do the same.

GUID is just another number generated and distributed by a protected system. Just like ISBN. There is or will be a controlling body who will assign the numbers. The same will hold true, you won't be allowed to generate a number privately and then claim it came from them, so i don't see how that's too different at all.

 

Okay, let's assume your vague assumption has any chance of standing in court. In that case:

1. there would have to be a governing body who monitors security keys by corporations. Not only is it not in the corporations interest to be giving them out, it's not the government's interest to be providing backup for stolen keys from corporations.

2. Sony would have had to have registered their key with that body.

3. No two companies would be allowed to have the same key.

4. The code signing system would only be allowed to accept numbers registered with this governing body.

The similarity is way too vague for any enforcement, and the idea of enforcement requires ludicrous rues to be put in place.

Sony cannot just declare by themselves "this is our number, and anything published with it shall be ours" to thin air and expect it to hold up in court. Get real.

And yes, GUIDs can be generated from any point using a corporate IP address. The governing body no longer would need to "issue" them.



Ail said:
thranx said:
Ail said:
thranx said:
Ail said:
fordy said:
KylieDog said:
fordy said:
Ail said:
fordy said:
Ail said:

I wonder if you guys would feel the same if the dude had posted a way to hack visa card transactions...

You're missing the point, since all hardware that makes those transactions IS owned by Visa, whereas a sold PS3 does not belong to Sony. It belongs to the consumer.


Visa owns my credit card ?

That's new to me... They may own the devices that read those cards but in most civilized countries ( except the US that are very backwards in that area) credit cards actually have chips and software on them...

These is what I am talking about :

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smart_card

Yes. Read the terms and conditions when applying. All credit cards remain the property of the credit card company.

Sony have their own TnC's about the PS3 and its security...

Sony have an EULA. The difference there is that a ToC requires a signature, and can be held up in court, whereas an EULA has little to no chance.

Sony are nailed to a wall here. Credit cards are cheap plastic. The PS3 is expensive electronics. If Sony gave the PS3 away for free, I wouldn't complain at all about whether they own it or not. However, to say that you pay upwards of $599 and NOT own your console is absurd.

I paid over 300k for my house and I can't paint it the color I want and I won't sue anyone over this.....

Really? I would be pissed. Did you buy  a house as part of a housing gated community that had pre set rules or something.


Nope.

there is a HoA but it's not a gated community, just a standard suburb and I understand the rules. if everyone does what they feel like, it's anarchy, which is exactly what happens in online games with cheaters...

 

You guys need to grow up and live in the real world.

Your are free to do whatever you want as long as it doesn't affect others.

Turns our it might be your liberty, but Geo Hotz is affecting mine too.......

 

And if you don't like the way Sony is handling the PS3. Here's a hint. it's not a necessity item, you can perfectly live without owning one, so I suggest you purchase a console with rules more to your liking...

I didn't realise that painting your house would affect others so much.

If i buy somthing I have every right to do with it what I want.

Gehot did not attack the psn, nor hack to cheat in games or pirate. So how did he affect you again?

I don't own one, I still hope too but ot enough gamin time to justify owning one yet. But this court case goes beyond that. I dopnt need it setting precedents for other companies to do the same.

Perhaps sony should go after the pirates and the people cheating instead of the guy who isn't doing those things.

You have to realize that for houses the view is something that has a monetary value, so anything that you can do that can affect the view people have from their houses is frowned upon and regulated by Home owners associations...

Same way that if you don't mow your lawn for a while or let it die you will be fined...

Some suburbs have rules against having prominent satelite dishes on houses...

Heck do you realize that to make any significant modification to your house you need  a permit, even if it's something that is not visible from the street side...

Try to buy a car and remove the safety belts and see how it goes. It's your car and you can do whatever you want with it right ? Wrong...And removing those belts will not endanger anyone else except you...

It's illegal in Europe to put heating gazoline into diesel car. And it's not because it doesn't work as well, They are the same, heating gaz has just a colorant to make it look different. The reason ? Because one is less taxed than the others so the government doesn't want to loose taxes....

It's not so different with Sony, they don't want you to run apps not coming from them because they don't perceive taxes on those. Seeing how they sold most of their PS3 at a loss, I can understand why.

So a government can do it but not a corporation ?


That is actually a very good example to compare. You can take the seat belts off of your car if you wish (hack the ps3), but you can not drive on the roads if you do so(go onto the psn). So again what did he do wrong? He did not hack the psn, he hacked his own hardware. He did not pirate games, he hacked his own hardware. what is so wrong about using your equiptemnt the way you want? He has not harmed anyone, others have, perhaps sony should try suing them instead



fordy said:
Spankey said:
fordy said:
Spankey said:
 

but you see, he cited one which can be attached to homebrew apps which are not developed, suported or distributed by Sony.

Putting a DKNY badge on a wallet does not make it automatically a wallet made by DKNY if you see what I'm getting at.

 

Except the only boundaries are whether the PS3 accepts it or not. Code signing is a simple mathematical equation if you CITE the number. Besdes your argument is flawed because Sony use the same key for everything, whereas ISBNs and UPCs require one code per product.

And for the record, there is talk about replacing the ISBNs with GUIDs, effectively dissolving the foundation to no more than just a checker for doubleups, so your argument doesn't hold up there, either.


you still don't get my point.

so what if Sony uses the same key to sign every piece of software they autherise?

The point is that GeoHot is not Sony and should have no right to sign something as coming from Sony when he is not Sony. he's flogging fake Sony goods to the PS3 and has told others how to do the same.

GUID is just another number generated and distributed by a protected system. Just like ISBN. There is or will be a controlling body who will assign the numbers. The same will hold true, you won't be allowed to generate a number privately and then claim it came from them, so i don't see how that's too different at all.

 

Okay, let's assume your vague assumption has any chance of standing in court. In that case:

1. there would have to be a governing body who monitors security keys by corporations. Not only is it not in the corporations interest to be giving them out, it's not the government's interest to be providing backup for stolen keys from corporations. No. it's how Sony id's something that theirs and or comes from them or their stable in their own internal system (like a product number). I.E Sony is the governing body here.

2. Sony would have had to have registered their key with that body. see 1

3. No two companies would be allowed to have the same key. Irrelevant. it is unlikely that one legit company would try pass itself or it's software as anothers. remember GeoHots method allows PS3's to run fake software (or homebrew etc.) as if it came from Sony.

4. The code signing system would only be allowed to accept numbers registered with this governing body. This is what Geohot has circumvented in the PS3 hack.

The similarity is way too vague for any enforcement, and the idea of enforcement requires ludicrous rues to be put in place.

Sony cannot just declare by themselves "this is our number, and anything published with it shall be ours" to thin air and expect it to hold up in court. Get real. Who'se keys (numbers) are they supposed to use then to identify and verify their authorised software? Microsofts? What is your view on the use of the MD5 Checksum algorithm? is that wrong too? is circumventing that fine as well?

And yes, GUIDs can be generated from any point using a corporate IP address. The governing body no longer would need to "issue" them. Any issued GUID would have to be checked for uniqueness which will require some form of body despite the frankly huge numbers of permutations that could be generated. someone will need to issue and conrol the identifier protion





Proud Sony Rear Admiral