What is Digg?97 Comments
- kevinmotel, on 10/10/2007, -1/+91The only way for software to NOT be worked around is to not release it in the first place. I love the hacking community.
- lengau, on 10/10/2007, -0/+55Well that didn't take long, did it?
Does anyone know yet if this will support the iPod touch as well? - Protoss, on 10/10/2007, -4/+34Was it really an encryption? It seems like Apple just improved upon their iTunesDB, by adding a checksum, which of course broke all third party programs.
- aussieNickuss, on 10/21/2007, -5/+30I love Apple, but why the hell do they think it is a good idea to forcibly stop the iPod from working with Linux? Isn't it the case of, the more they support, the more potential customers they have? Stupid Apple, you can be dumb sometimes.
- sockdemon, on 10/10/2007, -1/+25I share the sentiment, although I do wonder how many people from the first thread about this are wishing digg had an edit button.
"Oh, when I said that 'iPods will never work with anything but iTunes' I was using the modern definition of 'never', you know, the one that means in a few hours. What I really said was 'Ipods will work on linux in the next few hours, don't panic or sensationalize'. - skyshock1, on 10/10/2007, -10/+32My next mp3 player still won't be a new iPod. Sorry, I'm not giving Apple a pass for this one. I'd MUCH rather support a company that doesn't purposely lock you to their garbage software, and actually supports the music formats I want to use (ogg and FLAC). Cowon and iRiver come to mind...
- colincornaby, on 10/10/2007, -6/+27I hate to rain on the parade here... but isn't it perfectly possible Apple is hashing the database for reasons you'd normally hash? Like.. say... making sure the database doesn't get corrupted on your iPod? I mean, it's not like the only reason Apple would hash is for nefarious purposes. If they wanted to keep people out, they'd encrypt, not hash. I just think this sounds like Apple hating for the sake of Apple hating.
- CompIsMyRx, on 10/10/2007, -3/+22There is no lock, digital or otherwise, that can't be broken.
- salous, on 10/10/2007, -3/+19Hahaha, don't you ever mess with the Linux community!
- oneoverzero, on 10/10/2007, -1/+17One would assume... because the issue was in the library file..
- HappyScrappy, on 10/10/2007, -1/+14Actually, they did encrypt. They made a hash of the file and then encrypted the hash with some private data. This is a technique used to ensure that a file you are looking at was created by someone who knows the private data (presumably yourself).
To make sure the database isn't corrupt, all you need to do is hash it, encrypting the hash with a private key is optional, and thus was probably don't for some other purpose besides ensuring the file isn't corrupt. - kriminalintent, on 10/10/2007, -0/+13That was pretty quick. Good news.
- DelMonte, on 10/10/2007, -0/+12Dude, you're a little confused I think...
The 2nd gen nano didn't have this problem, and this news story talks about the new iTunes library files on new iPods like the Classic and the 3rd gen nano being cracked.
They're not talking about running Linux ON the new iPods, they're talking about the ability to use Linux programs to sync the new iPods. The 2nd gen nano still can't run Linux, but it can be used WITH Linux, and could even before this new hack. - tobias1482, on 10/10/2007, -2/+14No! You expressed logic! That can't happen here! This is digg!
- stiankarlsen, on 10/10/2007, -0/+11Why is there always some douchebag who's got to go there?
- brodsky13, on 10/10/2007, -0/+10Yes, but some locks are so hard to crack that they never do get cracked... which is what really matters at the end of the day.
- jaiwithani, on 10/10/2007, -0/+9Ipods on linux are supported - by the linux community.
What makes this case noteworthy is that Apple apparently took extraordinary steps to prevent other applications from accessing the iPod, rather than merely not supporting it. There is a difference between not supporting iPods under Linux and actively discouraging their use. This was a case of of the latter. - PhilH, on 10/10/2007, -0/+9Let me guess; 09 F9...
- bhattsan, on 10/10/2007, -4/+13all they did was encrypt it...
- xtraa, on 10/10/2007, -1/+10I am just c&p'ing from somewhere:
http://main.wtbw.co.uk/hash58.zip is all you need
1) build a broken itunes db
2) fix it with the hash generated with the tool by passing your fwid - DeathJux, on 10/10/2007, -3/+11Is the general populous of Digg this stupid? Apple has NEVER supported Linux, meaning ALL of the old iPods were "forced to use Apple's software." What you are forgetting is that people cracked it, just like they've done with this, to support other programs and OSes. This isn't something new, just the software scheme changed so new methods needed to be developed.
I worry about our community sometimes. - nreynolds, on 10/10/2007, -1/+9I love when words like "never" mean "soon" and "literally" means "i'm exaggerating this, you know, the complete opposite of 'literally' "
- thesquirrelwood, on 10/10/2007, -0/+8sha-1 does not encrypt, it's a hash
- GeckoSlayer, on 10/10/2007, -0/+8Dude.. Think of the cheese...
- XaeroVincent, on 10/10/2007, -4/+12Umm... excuse me?
In that case they will just be rushing to piss more and more *nix developers and users off.
If Apple had any clue at all they should allow *nix users to "support themselves".
There is little chance of Apple exceeding to work against the hacker community; all its doing is further tarnishing Apple's reputation as a music monopoly. - ffleming, on 10/10/2007, -0/+7I told you so.
- tobias1482, on 10/10/2007, -0/+7No. It's just that those locks aren't worth effort or desire.
- stiankarlsen, on 10/10/2007, -8/+14Exactly what I thought. I'm done with apple all together, it doesn't matter if the ipod works or not, it's just so shady supporting a company like that.
- SaintStryfe, on 10/10/2007, -3/+8THANK YOU.... I told everyone (especially the Apple haters) that Linux types were creative and would figure a method to do it. This is a security measure apple set up, and those who need it broken for legit reasons (like Linux syncing) would get it working soon enough. No no, QQ all over the place instead.
- EztliNahua, on 10/10/2007, -1/+6Mirror: http://s1.massmirror.com/c854fec4db2a00ff4aa9c860a426911c.html
- leontes, on 10/10/2007, -8/+13It's the last days of summer, with the gentle breathe of fall quick approaching: I feel bad for the apple support team as they are now going to have to rush to block this interference. Oh, come on, guys, let's give them a little break; let them spend some time with their families.
- kaiwai, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5No, this story is about syncing between *NIX and iPod - no where in the article does it talk about running Linux on the iPod.
- cfulp, on 10/10/2007, -1/+6While I use macs and Windows, thus not caring too much about this whole deal, but they added SHA-1 encryption to the database file. In other words, they purposely stopped people from reading it. Doesn't have anything to do with software running differently.
- cbiscuit3, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5great job, I knew it'd only be a matter of time
- hockey, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5I am officially going on record to say I hate the word "innovation". It's the newest buzzword and it has officially become annoying.
- shedtroll, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5Open source - 1 Apple - 0
- JEdwardFuck, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4So how long until rockbox?
- annoia, on 10/10/2007, -2/+6So you like Apple because:
* They try to stop you from using their products the way you want you to use them.
* They are piss poor at security.
I really don't get why you people keep using Apple, instead of some similar product, which lets you use the damned thing for whatever you want. - patpi, on 10/10/2007, -1/+5"wtbw suggested donations from thankful users go to Cancer Research UK."
http://www.cancerresearchuk.org/donate/
realy nice, i like OSource developers from today :] - xevidentx, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4why do you fools still support apple even though they are the main proponents of hardware lockdown... even more so than MS. say all you want about jobs giving you idiots lip service about how he wants drm taken out of songs, all the while locking down the ipod, iphone and mac hw. want to see a gullible?
- Otto, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3>>>"I hate to rain on the parade here... but isn't it perfectly possible Apple is hashing the database for reasons you'd normally hash? Like.. say... making sure the database doesn't get corrupted on your iPod? I mean, it's not like the only reason Apple would hash is for nefarious purposes. If they wanted to keep people out, they'd encrypt, not hash."
In this case, no. The purpose of the hash is clear, albeit two-fold.
1. It prevents the iTunesDB file from being transferred between iPods, since the hash incorporates the firewire ID number, which is unique to the iPod.
2. It prevents third parties from being able to create the iTunesDB file (until they figured out how to generate it, anyway).
A hash would not be needed for error checking because the iPod software already had a pretty decent error handling parser to begin with. And in this case, an incorrect hash prevents the iPod from loading anything at all. It adds a lot of extra processing to check the hash, and the error checking reason just doesn't hold up.
Also, they can't encrypt, they need to maintain backwards compatibility with old iPods. - inactive, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3There's a crack for Pro Tools... or at least a version that doesn't need cracking.
Never had a prob with the copy I snagged. - EdLesMann, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3@skyshock1
Have you looked at the Cowon A3? That to me looks like the best product. I am seriously considering that purchase in the next few months.
@superkendall
I bought an iPod and I hate it. It was by far the worst 300$ I ever spent. After about a month I was so fed up with iTunes, mp3, and DRM that the iPod sat in its box for the next 2 months doing nothing cause I couldn't find anyone who wanted it (I even tried giving it away). I would have never used it at all if it wasn't for Rockbox.
Then again, I don't think I am Apples target audience.
I use nothing but Linux (well I have a windows box at work that sits in the corner *should* I need it..).
There is no way in Hell you will ever convince me that giving up my rights for entertainment is worth any DRM'd content
I am a slight audiophile in that I want a crisp clear sound. Of my 80GB of music: 60% of my music collection is in Flac and another 30% is in OGG leaving less then 10% for every other music file format. Needless to say ITunes doesn't like those formats and there is no way in hell I am converting that much music to anything less then Flac or OGG.
I like to customize my interface to show only what I want seen and the customization options of white iPod or black iPod just doesn't cut it. I now have a kick-ass Mario theme that shows everything I want and need to know and I have full control over it.
Then there were the issues like when iTunes made a valient effort to delete my music the first time I pointed it at my collection and told it to import. Thank God for backups.
Then there is the fact that nothing worked right on the iPod until Rockbox...
I don't mind Apple at all. In fact I miss my Cube a lot :-( however, the Apple iPod just isn't for me no matter how hard I try. Rockbox is the only saving grace IMHO. - fak3r, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Thank you for the best comment I've read on this thread thus far. Apple is saying they don't want you as a user, they're locking you out, and you know updates will undo what the hacking community has done, so it's an endless circle. When I read they used SHA1 I laughed, they knew it wouldn't hold, but this new stance shows what's really going on over there, they're becoming Apple-soft. As an owner of 2 macs and 2 ipods I don't think I'll buy either again because of this; they can't tell me what OS to run, or how to use things I bought. Digital rights, know them, defend them or lose them.
More of my ranting/commentary here: http://lefttochance.com/?p=9 - HappyScrappy, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2This only lets you load songs on the unit. No one has cracked the protection on the Classic and 3G Nano (or even 2G Nano) that prevents you from running your own code on the unit.
- eean, on 10/10/2007, -2/+4I dunno if I would could call writing a device driver "cracking".
- loganisamonkey, on 10/10/2007, -2/+4Down after 75 diggs. Mirrors?
- heatus, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3The other day people were proclaiming that Apple was evil and I was dugg down for stating that it was their choice on how they develop their software/iPods. Now everybody is back on board and Apple is awesome once again.
- MacParrot, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Well, in the world of Apple (a scary place at times) there is also this section:
Those who prefer Apple products or services, but doesn't rush out and buy every single product if they don't need it or want it. Replace "Apple" with any other company name and you'll find that what most people do. - eean, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2only for old iPods I understand
-
Show 51 - 100 of 100 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is