full-disclosure - Do you really think CDs will be protected in future?

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

From: DaveHowe at cmn.sharp-uk.co.uk (Dave Howe)
Subject: Do you really think CDs will be protected in future?

David Vincent wrote:
> to put my mind at ease, please define "better" than the original.
I did - but I don't think it made it to the server yet :)

Ignoring the massive compilation cds (and the sad fact that most of the
ready-to-play cds will be taken *from* mp3 format) It is certainly
possible to use an older cdrom drive to "rip" the audio as a clean .wav
file, then reburn without any encoding loss - but without the software
protection, deliberate errors, and possibly with "value added" features
such as lyrics, discography and so forth added either to the subtrack data
or to a second "pc" session.

> by "better" do you may mean more portable, as in I can now put several
> albums on a single CDR and play that in a laptop etc. for more hours
> of music from a single CD form factor.
or create a compilation album - many people complain that albums are
basically two good tracks and ten that will never make it into the charts
as singles - assuming you get as many as 12.

> exactly, there is nothing stopping me from using my discman, plugging
> the audio jack into the back of my pc and doing a good old fashioned
> dub of the disc.  sure it is slow, but since these copy "protected"
> cds will play on standard equipment the only real degradation of the
> sound would be from the analog cable and some (likely) minor noise
> from the pc's internal components.
It was possible to make high-quality audio-audio copies in the old analog
copying days.
odd that so many were of such terrible quality isn't it? that is because
decent audio equipment is expensive, but a tape-to-tape "ghetto blaster"
is both cheap and easily replaced if confiscated.
For most "car boot sale" pirates, arrest and confiscation weren't an
occupational hazard, they were an expected and factored-in cost of the
process.