Alexandre Julliard wrote:
And if we delay it a bit more maybe we can slip in Safedisc support too...
Regarding which, does anyone have more up-to-date code and/or information regarding Safedisc support, than what is currently on the brand new Wine wiki page: http://wiki.winehq.org/SafeDisc ? Safedisc support seems to be a topic that is hacked upon by various people every now and then, but it does not seem very coordinated. It'd be great if the wiki page would help to report on who's working on what etc., and maybe even provide usable patches for users to try. -Timo
Also, just out of interest, would a working safedisc implementation provide the necessary underpinnings to support the hexalock copy protection system? (http://hexalock.co.il/) Timo Jyrinki wrote:
Alexandre Julliard wrote:
And if we delay it a bit more maybe we can slip in Safedisc support too...
Regarding which, does anyone have more up-to-date code and/or information regarding Safedisc support, than what is currently on the brand new Wine wiki page: http://wiki.winehq.org/SafeDisc ?
Safedisc support seems to be a topic that is hacked upon by various people every now and then, but it does not seem very coordinated. It'd be great if the wiki page would help to report on who's working on what etc., and maybe even provide usable patches for users to try.
-Timo
Am Sonntag 25 März 2007 17:33 schrieb Phil Costin:
Also, just out of interest, would a working safedisc implementation provide the necessary underpinnings to support the hexalock copy protection system? (http://hexalock.co.il/) I think the needed infrastructure is the same, but of course we will have to do extra bugfixing for each copy protection scheme.
That hexalock thing sounds pretty rootkitish. I suspect that the real content of the cd is encrypted, with an unencrypted decryption program. That decryption program installs a rootkit which catches and blocks copy operations on the source files and hacks MS IE 6 to prevent copy and paste. If they were not completely stupid I am afraid that thing will not work unless we load the driver into the Linux kernel. If the same driver that prevents copy operations does the decryption it will have to be hooked into the Linux cdrom driver. Maybe with raw access the decryption can be done to allow programs in wine to access the cd, but not Linux programs. There is a wikipedia page about it, but it is only a copy of the website. Of course if they are stupid enough to store the protected content unencrypted, then we only have to make the rootkit happy enough to give the app its OK. Personally I cannot see how their copy protected CDRs can resist a simple dd if=/dev/cdrom of=copy.iso
Stefan Dösinger wrote:
Am Sonntag 25 März 2007 17:33 schrieb Phil Costin:
Also, just out of interest, would a working safedisc implementation provide the necessary underpinnings to support the hexalock copy protection system? (http://hexalock.co.il/) I think the needed infrastructure is the same, but of course we will have to do extra bugfixing for each copy protection scheme.
That hexalock thing sounds pretty rootkitish. I suspect that the real content of the cd is encrypted, with an unencrypted decryption program. That decryption program installs a rootkit which catches and blocks copy operations on the source files and hacks MS IE 6 to prevent copy and paste.
If they were not completely stupid I am afraid that thing will not work unless we load the driver into the Linux kernel. If the same driver that prevents copy operations does the decryption it will have to be hooked into the Linux cdrom driver. Maybe with raw access the decryption can be done to allow programs in wine to access the cd, but not Linux programs. There is a wikipedia page about it, but it is only a copy of the website.
Of course if they are stupid enough to store the protected content unencrypted, then we only have to make the rootkit happy enough to give the app its OK.
Personally I cannot see how their copy protected CDRs can resist a simple dd if=/dev/cdrom of=copy.iso
You're right, the hexalock disc content is mostly encrypted. It's pretty nasty stuff really. -Phil
On Sun, Mar 25, 2007 at 05:31:03PM +0300, Timo Jyrinki wrote:
Alexandre Julliard wrote:
And if we delay it a bit more maybe we can slip in Safedisc support too...
Regarding which, does anyone have more up-to-date code and/or information regarding Safedisc support, than what is currently on the brand new Wine wiki page: http://wiki.winehq.org/SafeDisc ?
No.
Safedisc support seems to be a topic that is hacked upon by various people every now and then, but it does not seem very coordinated. It'd be great if the wiki page would help to report on who's working on what etc., and maybe even provide usable patches for users to try.
No, the people stopped hacking on it. Basically it needs: - virtual objects served by a windows kernel driver - access to these objects must work as to any other object It is likely that a large rewrite of the whole object handling in the Wine Server is necessary to accomplish a Alexandre accepted solution. Ciao, Marcus
participants (4)
-
Marcus Meissner -
Phil Costin -
Stefan Dösinger -
Timo Jyrinki