What is Digg?91 Comments
- euphonious, on 10/12/2007, -9/+88Pretty hard? It's impossible. But this should help:
09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0 - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -7/+73HEY RIAA / MPAA / WHOEVER:
Cant touch this!
http://hddvd.ytmnd.com/ - jdoo, on 10/12/2007, -10/+54Isn't it pretty hard to go from MD5->original data? What is the point of this?
- sleepless, on 10/12/2007, -7/+41MDlGOTExMDI5RDc0RTM1QkQ4NDE1NkM1NjM1Njg4QzA=
base64.
dig it - suprememilo, on 10/12/2007, -6/+37T3H INTERNET MOBS ARE T3H ANGRY!
- dunezone, on 10/12/2007, -7/+29http://i17.tinypic.com/66m4hw2.jpg
http://img393.imageshack.us/img393/5512/pic4iq5.jpg
Suck it MPAA - hydoskee, on 10/12/2007, -2/+18I'm just putting this out there: http://md5encryption.com/?mod=decrypt
It's fun to Decrypt a specific MD5 with this, and see how a hex string can take away the credibility of a social news site. - DaffyDuck, on 10/12/2007, -5/+19"I don't get it, how the hell does this make front page?"
You see, there's this digg button and when people press it...ah nevermind, just refer to one of the 8 billion answers already posted to this question. - PathDaemon, on 10/12/2007, -1/+13Gak! A derivative work!
- mcfo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+12Read doom9 forums if you want the tech stuff but it wasn't reverse engineered.
- Darkjedi, on 10/12/2007, -1/+13It isn't just about the code. It's about the idea of the code.
- pseudojd, on 10/12/2007, -2/+13don't piss of the smart vengeful userbase. See fark.com last week.
- calgone, on 10/12/2007, -7/+18No its not illegal but damn is it gay.
- ksool, on 10/12/2007, -0/+11You don't seem to understand... for many, digg is more than just a news site, it's a community run by nerds, populated by nerds. The reason people love digg and are willing to take digg off an adblock list and all this kind of stuff is because we're supporting members of our own community, people who've come from the same places we've been, digging each others sites and content, and hell, generating revenue for digg itself, as opposed to handing over money to guys in suits who run mass media.
This is fine and is what give digg such a large and dedicated audience. However, when something like this happens, it's expected that digg continue to act like a member of the community. As individuals, we don't have the power to argue the intellectual property value of a hex key in court, but as a community, we do. We don't have the power to argue that a site isn't responsible for the content posted by its users, but digg does. We're not just members of the community so we can digg videos of kids getting kicked in the nuts,
The problem is that the Digg admins bowed out to save their own skins. If digg died to law suits, several sites would spring up in its place and the community would continue. They're acting in their own interest, not in the interest of the people who put them in such a position of power. And I'm sure as a community, though donations and ads, we'd easily cover the legal expense if they were to stand up and act on our behalf, especially considering that a lot of this stuff doesn't have a legal precedent set yet.
In the end, digg is just limiting its own importance. Where it could be the center of a serious legal debate over freedom of speech and intellectual property, they are limiting their own influence to just sharing news to protect their own livelihood. It's a safer move, yea, but I think most of us deeply hoped for something different. - jdoo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9This isnt really "decryption" of MD5. They just have a database of strings that users have submitted and they save the resulting MD5's. Besides, MD5 isn't encryption, it is a hashing algorithm.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6@geoken: Movies are not "information". Most movies aren't worth the discs they're printed on.
@Tridentboy: I'll leave dig when you take off your stormtrooper costume and leave your mothers' basement. - Teegtahn, on 10/12/2007, -5/+10This whole thing seems kinda dumb, the community is up in arms about them censoring people breaking the law by spreading anti-copyright-protection codes? I'm not even sure how to USE something like that, but you have to understand that digg has to cover it's ass or else IT GOES AWAY. If the FBI has enough beef with a site like this, it will go away.
You can argue freedom of speech all you want, but freedom to speech is not freedom to distribute copyright materials. Now, this may not be word for word, but I recall something like "reverse engineering a product to defeat a copyright protection service is illegal" and I think is one of the reasons why Office 2007 is getting bad rap (since Microsoft made it illegal for someone to make something that converts the files to 2007 format (because you would have to reverse engineer their DRM stuff)).
Digg is just covering themselves (if they are indeed deleting articles and users) so they can continue to provide you a place to share content, and points of interest on the Internet. - CrucifiedEgo, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5The point of this post wasn't to "spread the key". It's to point out the obsurdity of claiming trade secrecy on a series of hex values, which in the end are just bits anyway. I'm sure somewhere else that series of hex values has shown up in a binary file, or even used in some other way. Is everyone out there liable if they use some form of "the number" as a password, or happens to be a part of their SSL key? God knows where that ends. I'm a musician, and not entirely against all forms of DRM(though i haven't ever seen one that I like) but this is ridiculous.
- digiwombat, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6Seriously... have you guys stopped using YouTube because they chose not to get shut down?
I mean, I am just not following here. Aren't you attacking the wrong people? How many of you even own an HD-DVD player? Isn't this the MPAA's fault really? Or the government for allowing such loose intellectual copyright laws?
I don't give a damn how many of you visit my site, I'm not going to jail or getting my site/company/life ruined in one way to another so that you can play net games from your anonymous high chair. - mcfo, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6Is this number illegal, too, do you think? Or am I being backwards?
C0 88 56 63 C5 56 41 D8 5B E3 74 9D 02 11 F9 09 - blup3ace, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3im on ur internets, spreding ur hex keyes
09F911029D74E35BD84156C5635688C0
AJJ1D2BCC323DA34ADF349009AAEBFA
^random gibberish i just typed^ - marcan, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3No, you can't decrypt an MD5 hash. In fact, with this hash, you can't even brute force it (which would take milennia anyway), since it's a hash of the ASCII hex representation of the key, which is longer than the hash, so you'd wind up with some other random number that has the same MD5 first (a collision). Unless you knew the exact formatting, in which case you might have a chance. Or you can use a dictionary attack, which means you already need to have the source stored somewhere, which defeats the purpose. That site is a complete misnomer - it just looks in an internal dabase (likely constructed using the strings that people submit).
This would be useful to find the processing key in memory in some HD-DVD player software though. Just hash every possible section of memory and find the one that matches. If nothing else, this should be perfectly legal - it's just a hash and it's non reversable, so it should be safe to distribute. It allows you to verify you've got the right processing key.
Then again, the hash isn't even done right, because it's a hash of the ASCII HEX DUMP of the key, not of the (binary) key. The MD5 hash of the AACS key (as a binary string) is cfddca0b93558c11cd6d2a7023a544bf. - merreborn, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4"Isn't it pretty hard to go from MD5->original data? What is the point of this?"
Essentially, the only viable way to reverse MD5 is to brute force it.
For a 64 byte value, assuming you can generate and test 1,000,000 64 byte values every second (probably a *very* generous estimate), you'd be looking at about 272 years of compute time, if my math is any good. - ameyer17, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3 I for one welcome our 09F911029D74E35BD84156C5635688C0-hashing overlords
- geoken, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3When I say information I'm talking about the key itself and not whatever the key can be used to do. I'd wager more than 99% of the people here don't have the means to use the key because they don't have an HD-DVD player attached to their computer.
The censoring of a number off sites like Digg and Wikipedia is what people are pissed about. It's the act of censoring that's angering people, they couldn't care less what the number is used for. If they can stop people from spreading a number without anyone objecting, what's the next thing they will be allowed to do? What's the next ridiculous law they will be allowed to pass? - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5Dude, quit interjecting reason and logic. Or else th3 leet userz will squash yer intarweb pipes!!
FTW!!! - Teegtahn, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4a trade secret can be a series of hex values, the same as a recipie can be a trade secret, but by your argument, why should a recipie be a trade secret? it's words on page..
It's a trade secret because it unlocks something. They're not saying it doesn't exist anywhere else, they're just trying to keep people from relating that paticular key with the product it unlocks. - merr, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3What's the point if you can't decrypt it?
- CydeWeys, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Spiffytech: Um, no, MD5 hashes are NOT unique. Think about it. There are only 2^128 different possible MD5 hashes. There are 8*2^700,000,000 different possible CD ISOs. This is a basic principle called the pigeonhole problem. If you have a lot of pigeons and a lot fewer holes, there have to be many pigeons to a hole.
By the way, MD5 is partially broken, and it is possible to generate arbitrary collisions. - dagamer34, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2As if because AACS members sent cease and desist letters for linking to the key on the internet, no one bothered to write it down WHERE THEY CAN'T GET YOU.
Lol. - CrucifiedEgo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2A recipe isn't a good example. A recipe directly correlates to the content. This would be more like figuring out what BRAND of BUTTER restaurant X uses to make it's secret-recipe cookies. That alone isn't enough to make the cookies, but it's enough to get you on your way if you know what you're doing. The same applies here.
- Khac, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3I love Digg.
- mymate, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4all these news posts about this hack is riddicious - yea cool theres a hack but not worth getting the top10 littered with posts all about the same thing
- Tiak, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Really, it's fairly likely the the actual data that is used to check the key on each disk is "d1af2e56517a7202a1cc087a69c4e296" as MD5 is a common encryption, and the data that was cracked was discovered based upon SOME hash of it.
- Blakeeb, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Let's move digg to the Tor network! Start your engines, developers!
- rcardona2k, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Turk 182
- xkrwlng, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1whats a HD DVD?
- iTacoMan, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Whoop de ***** doo. It's a ***** md5 of an already known alphanumeric code. Shut up and get over it, Digg is not your life.
- mahoneyt, on 10/12/2007, -4/+5ummm, you CAN decrypt it. *cough* google *cough*
or... http://md5encryption.com/?mod=decrypt - marcan, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Take the acronym expansion of AACS, all lowercase, no spaces, and take the first 16 letters of that. For each letter, XOR the ASCII byte with the corresponding value from this list:
68 9d 67 63 f3 17 86 3f b9 22 35 a0 10 25 eb af
Now, are they going to sue their trademark department for providing half of the key that unlocks their Processing key to the general public? - ryborg, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1This is the stupidest thing I have seen get Dugg up. You might as well have posted your shadowed /etc/passwd file.
- ageekazoid, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1ooooh yea
:? - ChefAnubis, on 10/12/2007, -0/+109 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
- thomas41546, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1try it here http://www.md5decrypter.com
your welcome :) - Urusai, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Does somebody have the SHA-1 of the MD5? Surely it's not too late to copyright it?
- HoGiHung, on 10/12/2007, -6/+7Ok, we get it. Keep the number in circulation, but by god how did this crap make the first page? Further evidence that the digg system is rigged.
Ho... - mroo, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2@jdoo:
You are correct, For values longer than 16 bytes it is impossible to reconstructed the data.
@merrelborn:
@tiak:
MD5 is a secure digest algorythm. This is VASTLY different than encryption.
Encryption is REVERSABLE and PROTECTS data.
SDA's are ONE WAY and creates a NON-UNIQUE signature.
Because MD5 hash is 16 bytes long and you know:
1) original data was less than 16 bytes long
2) you know the exact length of the input
3) the 16byte md5 hash value
You can 'reverse' the hash. This is entirely pointless however because the purpose of the Secure Digest Algorythm is nothing more than to verify that contents of a message is 'MOST LIKELY' unaltered.
Or in other words, a message with the same md5has would be vastly different from the expected message.
@cruifiedego:
Maybe their are less diggs than views because everyone read it and thought it is not worth digging? *JUST A HUNCH* - Jo9100, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1md5(?????) = d1af2e56517a7202a1cc087a69c4e296
- Jo9100, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1md5(?????) = d1af2e56517a7202a1cc087a69c4e296
- dicky6468, on 12/17/2007, -0/+0http://www.gov-auctions.org
Government and Police auctions for cars,trucks SUV's.
http://cars.gov-auctions.org
Online car auctions
__________________________________________________
http://www.diet-article.com
__________________________________________________ -
Show 51 - 89 of 89 discussions
The Digg Toolbar for Firefox lets you Digg, submit content, and keep track of Digg even when you're not on the Digg site. Download the official 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is 
