Own Your Own 128-Bit Integer

Byte Swapper writes "After all the fuss over the AACS trying to censor a certain 128-bit number that now has something over two million hits on Google, the folks at Freedom to Tinker would like to point out that you too can own your own integer. They've set up a script that will generate a random number, encrypt a copyrighted haiku with it, and then deed the number back to you. You won't get a copyright on the number or the haiku, but your number has become an illegal circumvention device under the DMCA, such that anyone subject to US law caught distributing it can be punished under the DMCA's anti-trafficking section, for which the DMCA's Safe Harbor provisions do not apply. So F9090211749D5BE341D8C5565663C088 is truly mine now, and you can pry it out of my cold, dead fingers!"

5D 09 7F B4 60 B8 FB BD D0 2B 6A A3 F2 F6 AB CA

That's right, 5D 09 7F B4 60 B8 FB BD D0 2B 6A A3 F2 F6 AB CA is mine, and I'll be playing it in the Impossiball Lottery twice a week until it pays off. No more Quick Picks for me!

Remember kids, no one else out there can ever use 5D 09 7F B4 60 B8 FB BD D0 2B 6A A3 F2 F6 AB CA to play the lotto, to decrypt anything ... or even as a WPA (or WEP) key!

I'll be googling 5D 09 7F B4 60 B8 FB BD D0 2B 6A A3 F2 F6 AB CA everyday until I win that lotto jackpot ... and don't think I won't. I'm crazy enough to do it. I swear I am. Really.

Eat it!

5D 09 7F B4 60 B8 FB BD D0 2B 6A A3 F2 F6 AB CA

Ha! You'll never catch me coppahs!

Re:Eat it!

50 AE 9B C2 10 05 0E 52 EB EA 82 B8 FB E7 30 6A

Don't you just love it!

Re:Eat it!

Dear Corpuscavernosa.

We represent WrongSizeGlass Freedom-To-Tinker Content System Licensing Administrator, WCS LA. WFCS is an integrated set of technological protection measures that controls access to and prevents unauthorized copying of copyrighted Haikus.

It is our understanding that you are providing to the public the above-identified tools and services, and are thereby providing and offering to the public a technology, product, service, device, component, or part thereof that is primarily designed, produced, or marketed for the purpose of circumventing the technological protection measures afforded by WFCS (hereafter, the "circumvention offering"). Doing so constitutes a violation of the anti-circumvention provisions of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (the "DMCA"), 17 U.S.C. 1201(a)(2) and 1201(b)(1). Providing or offering the circumvention offering identified above, and any other such offering that is primarily designed or produced to circumvent protection measures, or which has only limited commercial significant purpose other than to circumvent, or which are offered to the public with knowledge that it is for use in circumventing, violates the rights of WCS and any others harmed as well. See 1201(a)(2), 1201(b)(1), and 1203.

In view of the foregoing apparent anti-circumvention violations, we demand that you immediately:

1) remove or cause to be removed the above-specified WFCS circumvention offering and any other circumvention offering which is designed, produced or provided to circumvent WFCS or to assist others in doing so, and/or any links directly thereto, and

2) refrain from posting or causing to be provided any WFCS circumvention offering or from assisting others in doing so, including by direct links thereto, on any website now or at any time in the future.

Failure to do so will subject you to legal liability.

Please confirm to the undersigned in writing no later than noon a week from the above-indicated date that you have complied with these demands. You may reach the undersigned by telephone at [private] or by email at [private]@proskauer.com. WCS LA reserves all further rights and remedies with respect to this matter.

Very truly yours,

[private]
Counsel for WFCS LA

Re:Eat it!

Give that I've run this script on a quantum computer, all your base are belong to me!

Please send royalty payments to:
128 Infinite Alley.
Fort Meade, MD 20755

Thanks!

Re:Eat it!

You mean "All your base 16 are belong to me," don't you?

Re:5D 09 7F B4 60 B8 FB BD D0 2B 6A A3 F2 F6 AB CA

Personally, I thought it'd be pretty neat to encrypt something using the text of a DMCA takedown notice as a key.

Re:5D 09 7F B4 60 B8 FB BD D0 2B 6A A3 F2 F6 AB CA

Why wouldn't you just use the text of the DMCA itself as the key? Then the government can't publish it!

Pasting the text of this page [loc.gov] into a word processor, I learn that it is 177,926 characters long, with spaces. That's a 1,423,408-bit key.

Better get started.

Re:5D 09 7F B4 60 B8 FB BD D0 2B 6A A3 F2 F6 AB CA

US courts ruled in the Adobe case that Rot13 was a form of copy protection.

Oddly enough, I believe it can then be argued that ROT-26 is also an encryption device:

1. Rot-13 is an encryption device, assuming your comment is correct.
2. ROT-13 is a simple substitution cypher. Decryption is defined as subtracting 13 characters, wrapping at A, where ROT13 encryption is defined as adding 13 characters, wrapping at Z.
3. By extension, any substitution cypher is a DMCA-approved cypher.
4. ROT-1..infinity follow the same algorithm as ROT-13. They simply aren't symmetrical in the way that ROT-13 happens to be (re-encryption leads to plaintext). The symmetry of ROT-13 is purely coincidental due to the fact that 13 is 1/2 of 26. It is not necessarily an intended function of the cypher. This phenomenon will also exhibit periodically in ROT-26, ROT-39, ROT-52, and all later ROT-type algorithms with a key which is a multiple of 13.
5. ROT-26 is included in the set of ROT-1 through ROT-infinity. Coincidentally, it also exhibits the quirk of symmetry, where re-encryption reveals the plaintext.

Q.E.D. - ROT-26 is an approved DMCA cypher, and can be used to protect copyrighted materials.

This post is copyrighted material which has been encrypted using ROT-26. By reading it, you have circumvented my copy protection device. Please cease and desist immediately.

Re:5D 09 7F B4 60 B8 FB BD D0 2B 6A A3 F2 F6 AB CA

Shame on you!
Your logic is flawed.

1. Rot-13 is an encryption device, assuming your comment is correct.
2. ROT-13 is a simple substitution cypher. Decryption is defined as subtracting 13 characters, wrapping at A, where ROT13 encryption is defined as adding 13 characters, wrapping at Z.
3. By extension, any substitution cypher is a DMCA-approved cypher.

The fact that a member of a class has a certain property (ROT-13 being a DMCA approved encryption device) does not mean that all the members of that class have the same property. I am a member of the animals' group, I can use a computer therefore all animals can use a computer..... I don't think so.

Nobody said that ROT-14 would be considered an encryption device by the DMCA.

Your best chance to prove ROT-26 is a DMCA approved encryption method would be to read the legalese and find the definition of "encrpytion" in the text and hope it is not a very good definition. Something like "a function INTENDED to prevent observation by an untrusted party" would be enough, especially if they do not mention keys. In that case, it doesn't have to work successfully to be an "encryption device".

If that is the case, I propose the identity function as the new DRM standard.

C0 88 56 63 C5 56 41 D8 5B E3 74 9D 02 11 F9 09 to everyone, and remember, Intel CPUs are little endian!

Isn't Rot13 enough?

Actually, let's say it's not rot13, but rather, rot128 -- that is, every byte xor'd against 0x80. (I think, I'm a little fuzzy on binary and hex now.) That should make it nice and universal, symmetric, and something easy enough for everyone to know.

For safety's sake, the following should be done on an encrypted partition, and you should still shred the files afterwards.

Go take your favorite movie (DVD is easy, but high def if you can), rip it -- doesn't matter much how, raw bits would be especially insulting, but re-encode if you like. Take your shiny new DVD rip, add a note saying "Enjoy! And if anyone from the MPAA is reading, HOW DO YOU LIKE YOUR DMCA NOW, YOU CUNTS? IT'S ILLEGAL TO READ THIS, I'LL SEE YOU IN COURT!!"

Zip/rar it all up, so it's one file, to make it simple, and run that one file through rot0x80. Save the shiny new crypted file on your hard drive somewhere, maybe give it a .rot13 extension -- so you're not really revealing your key, but everyone knows what you mean -- and distribute it via P2P.

Now, if everyone takes equal care when playing the movie -- and I imagine we could add rot0x80 support to mplayer/vlc, if you only did it on the media file itself -- then while I am not a laywer, I don't see how they could legally get any kind of conviction against you. Simply don't put the "key" in the players, and require the person to input it every time they play -- then, you can claim you didn't know (since the file was legal to redistribute, just not legal to open), and if they accuse you of piracy, you can immediately turn it around and accuse them of DMCA violations.

Not really an original idea, mind you. I can't point to the person who first used it to encrypt The Number, thus making it illegal for the MPAA to stop its spread. But the point here is, legally, I don't see a way out of this unless they subpeona (which is why all the disk encryption), and you can get around that easily enough -- simply use a temporary partition/filesystem, and throw away the key when you're done with that particular disc. In fact, leave the machine on and generate a random number, so you can truthfully say that you never did know the key, meaning they have absolutely no evidence you did something wrong, except the glaringly obvious bit that they're not allowed to use.

Re:5D 09 7F B4 60 B8 FB BD D0 2B 6A A3 F2 F6 AB CA

I got one of these yesterday, but really, who has time to remember such long numbers. However, I know that it had a "D2" in it, so I figure anytime I see a number which contains this unique fingerprint, I'll assume it is my number. Fortunately, no-one has violated my rights by posting a number with "D2" in it as a comment to this article yet. You all are warned!

Re:5D 09 7F B4 60 B8 FB BD D0 2B 6A A3 F2 F6 AB CA

Sorry, this guy [answers.com] has prior art.... better luck next time.

Oh, and don't try C3 either, that's taken too.

Re:5D 09 7F B4 60 B8 FB BD D0 2B 6A A3 F2 F6 AB CA

Actually parent was funny, but he brought up an interesting point. How far can things go when a simple number can be made illegal under the DMCA? If i use a sequence of numbers for encryption and then those numbers show up on the lottery, is the lottery liable for a DMCA violation? Maybe someone should intentionally 'abuse' this system to force the DMCA to be corrected.

I think I'll take 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 01

That one should pay off pretty quickly :-)

Re:I think I'll take 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 01

That's my IP address you insensitive clod!

I hereby give you permission to try and hack me on that IP address!

503 is mine now, dogs!

Woo hoo! I now own the rights to "503 Service Temporarily Unavailable"! Crank up the phone, Maw, we're callin' us a fancy city lawyer and suing ourselfs any site that gets slashdotted!

And if my luck holds out, I'll own "404" next.

no longer naked and petrified

hex("natalie portman") = 6e 61 74 61 6c 69 65 20 70 6f 72 74 6d 61 6e 00
Now she's mine! Those of you who invoke hot grits will be hearing from my lawyer.

Re:no longer naked and petrified

Hot Grits will get Hot Writs?

But context IS IMPORTANT!!!

I'll be googling 5D 09 7F B4 60 B8 FB BD D0 2B 6A A3 F2 F6 AB CA everyday until I win that lotto jackpot ... and don't think I won't. I'm crazy enough to do it. I swear I am. Really.

Yeah, funny, and all that. But people here frequently don't get the point.

It's not the number - it's the context of the number. Yes, I can use this number for my WEP key. I can print it on my T-shirt, print it on toilet paper and wipe my ass with it. I can do whatever you want with this number so long as I don't identify it as the decryption key for YOUR encrypted data.

Here's another example: A tennis racket. By itself, a tennis racket is made for whacking tennis balls. However, I could whack YOU with the racket, and suddenly its role changes from "sporting equipment" to "deadly weapon". But it's the same piece of equipment, and yes, a tennis racket is a plenty good enough weapon to kill somebody with.

It's not the racket itself that's deadly, it's the context for how its used or presented. There's a world of difference between "I'm going to whack the ball" and "I'm going to whack your balls"...

By publishing this number along with phrases like "decryption key for NNN", you've crossed the line from just some random number to establishing the context of the number as somehow important.

So please, please PLEASE get the point - having and/or publishing a number, any number, isn't illegal. Publishing that this number (instead of the billions/trillions of others like it) is the decryption key for $FOO is what's illegal. // now done with armchair legal advice, resuming programming, IANAL YMMV and all that jazz //

Re:But context IS IMPORTANT!!!

I can do whatever you want with this number so long as I don't identify it as the decryption key for YOUR encrypted data.

But what if it's the encryption key for my encrypted data. It's hard to say data "belongs" to anybody to begin with, and if I paid for the DVD on which the data is encrypted I should unquestionably have access to the tools necessary to decrypt it (for fair use backups, for example) regardless of whether I own the data or not. Furthermore, I contend that free speech protections allow me to say "x is the key to the AACS encryption scheme." Even if you don't agree, arguing (for example) that it's analogous to giving out password or personal data is fallacious. The data encrypted by the key is neither, and, as I noted earlier, decryption ability is necessary for fair use.

Here's another example: A tennis racket. By itself, a tennis racket is made for whacking tennis balls. However, I could whack YOU with the racket, and suddenly its role changes from "sporting equipment" to "deadly weapon". But it's the same piece of equipment, and yes, a tennis racket is a plenty good enough weapon to kill somebody with.

Yeah, yeah... but we don't ban the tennis raquet. Nor do we ban you talking about the tennis raquet. Anything, anything at all, can be abused. That doesn't mean we should ban it, or talking about it in a certain context. By your own logic, you've commited a crime... by talking about using a tennis raquet in the context of murder. You've "crossed the line."

Even so, I'll grant you that such logic might sell in court. That doesn't matter to me, I feel that one's free speech rights should only be limited by what actually harms others... not merely could be used to harm others. Anything can be abused.

--sabre86

Re:But context IS IMPORTANT!!!

>I can do whatever you want with this number so long as I don't identify it as the decryption key for YOUR encrypted data.

>However, I could whack YOU with the racket, and suddenly its role changes from "sporting equipment" to "deadly weapon".

You don't charge mystery writers for murder just because they show in detail how to do so.
You don't charge news reporters with breaking-and-entering because they communicate to the public how breaking-and-entering was performed.
You don't censor history books because they outline how to commit acts of genocide.

Re:But context IS IMPORTANT!!!

You don't charge mystery writers for murder just because they show in detail how to do so.
You don't charge news reporters with breaking-and-entering because they communicate to the public how breaking-and-entering was performed.
You don't censor history books because they outline how to commit acts of genocide.

In none of these cases is talking about it a crime. It's also not a crime to talk about releasing the decryption key. But releasing the encryption key IS illegal under current law.

I'm not arguing that it SHOULD be illegal, only that it is. Don't confuse "legal" with "right". Lots of things are legal that are unethical, and lots of things are ethical but illegal. But let's spend our time discussing reality instead of some contrived misunderstanding, OK?

ok then

I'll see your F9090211749D5BE341D8C5565663C088 and raise you a F9090211749D5BE341D8C5565663D184

Why stop there

Why not create a system where ANY 128bit number can decrypt the haiku. Then you can go after anyone distributing any 128bit number. Say, like using IPv6.

Re:Why stop there

The DMCA never states that it is illegal to distribute any number, it states that it is illegal to distribute a number which has the sole/main/intended/implied/whatever-else purpose of breaking a copyright measure.

If you had encrypted your haiku with any 128bit number then it would most probably be deemed that someone with a 128bit IP address was using your number by co-incidence. If however your 128-bit haiku encryption number appeared on a "how to decrypt encrypted haikus" website, then you would have a case however.

The answer

I'm going to go register "42".

Then I will own the answer to life, the universe, and everything.

Kudos to Heavy Metal Jacket

97 A5 9D EB B9 9C AD 48 5C 0F 61 3B 51 46 73 30

This is my 128-bit integer. There are many like it but this one is mine. My 128-bit integer is my best friend. It is my life. I must master it as I must master my life. Without me, my 128-bit integer is useless. Without my 128-bit integer I am useless.

--
Above content protected under DMCA, DRM and AACS (as a trade secret) by Johnny F.
--
Oh, drat, I spilled the bean.

MINE

i hereby state copyright over the number 277, which is an expression of duality of the universe (heat/cold good/evil), and the fact all things, including 7, which is lucky,, are better in twos. Any expression of this piece of my work without my express written consent will be prosecuted to the full extent of any applicable laws.

--UPDATE--

I have noticed that some pirates have converted this note to a tone, they are calling it C sharp (277hz). My number is to be represented as a digit only, this is obviously an encryption circumvention technique and will not be tolerated. Please fork over 5 trillion dollars and your first born child.

NOW!

My key...

Here's my copyrighted key:

"Service Temporarily Unavailable
The server is temporarily unable to service your request due to maintenance downtime or capacity problems. Please try again later."

I'm worried that someone will try to claim prior art though... :S

96 51 0F ED DF EC 61 18 D5 19 7E E9 74 48 72 D8

It's mine! Stay away!

Microsoft is Good!
NetBSD is slow!
OpenSource licensing is for idealistic hippies!

Hmm... Let's see now:

1. Make inflammatory statements.
2. ???
3. Profit!!

It seems like the infamous "Step 2" is "Trick slashdotters into including a DMCA DRM Circumvention Scheme in the Subject of their replies.

Excellent...

Re: 96 51 0F ED DF EC 61 18 D5 19 7E E9 74 48 72 D

What
            damn lamness filter
do
            screwing up my silly
you
            visual slashdot jokes!
mean
            Why are the editors
NetBSD
            such humorless clods?
is
            Wait, was that a
Slow?
            Haiku? I should encrypt
I'm
            It, so that I can enjoy
Posting
            ownership of a 128-bit
This
            number.
From

It!

Which integer?

One of the basic properties of copyright is that if you enclose it in quotes and attribute the source, like "09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0", then there's no problem. This quoted integer is the public key for HD-DVD and Blu-Ray players.

Well, it is a dead end

Practically every cryptographer will agree that as soon as your secret key is known, it is too late for damage control. The only thing you can do is change the key. Trying to suppress it is entirely futile and a singn of significant stupidity.

At the same time, you cannot protect numbers. They do not belong to anybody.

i own the answer to everything

00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 42
thats right suckers! I own the answer to life, the universe, and everything. Please, don't all send your checks to me at once.

Re:i own the answer to everything

Since it's hex, you own 66. Now if you owned 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 2A on the other hand...

Turn it into an image

You can turn your own, personal 128 bits into an image here: http://robots.org.uk/itii/ [robots.org.uk]

My 128 bit number, to AACS programmers with love

fa ce ad ec ad e0 fd ec af c0 ff ee 4b ad co de

Re:Typical of liberals...

"Making fun of the RIAA and the DMCA to justify pirating music. You are all criminals."

Isn't it great?!?!?!?!?!

Re:Typical of liberals...

Making fun of the RIAA and the DMCA to justify pirating music. You are all criminals.

Piss off, some of us are communists.

Re:Typical of liberals...

"you insensitive clod" would have fit nicely in there.

Re:Typical of liberals...

In Soviet Russia, punchline forgets you!

Re:Typical of liberals...

I'm an insensitive clod you insensitive...

oh wait...

Re:Typical of liberals...

Being a criminal means infringing on someone's rights. Rights are defined as to determine how scarce resources are to be controlled. Information is not a scarce resource, by copying music from someone, I am not invading anyone's property, or if you prefer infringing on anyone's right.

Re:Typical of liberals...

You missed out 'How many roads must a man walk down?'

What is a criminal?

Lots of laws need to be broken. Bad laws disobeyed get them changed. How do you feel about the 'criminal' blacks that rode in the front of the bus in Mongomery Alabama in the 60's. Clearly criminal, but was it wrong?

DRM is not about copyright infringement, it is about criminalizing not letting some one control how you use what you actually buy and pay for.

I am sick of hearing that not paying some media giant every time you hear some song, or watch some movie is piracy. I do not think it is, and I do not think there is naything wrong with sharing it for free.

What I think copyright piracy is, it to make counterfeit CD's DVD's etc and selling them for money.

I see nothing at all wrong with sharing software, movies, songs, books, etc as long as you are not representing them to be original or charging for them.

Is this the way the laws are today? , nope, cause we have corrupt politicos doing the bidding of the big media companies that finance their campaigns.

So if my conscience tells me some law is wrong, unfair, or unjust, oh well.

Bad laws need to be broken often enough to make them change.

Looks at the 09 f9 thing, people have just had enough silliness with this.

Cheers
 

Re:Typical of liberals...

Making fun of the RIAA and the DMCA to justify pirating music. You are all criminals.

      First off, we're talking about DVD's and movies, not music.

      Secondly then if you want to live in a world where a corporation has the power to determine IF you are allowed to watch a movie you purchased, how many times, and on what equipment - then so be it. Most of us resent the very thought, much less this feeble and poorly thought out attempt at implementation.

      Thirdly, copyright infringement has only recently been made a "crime", in the US. In many other countries it's a civil matter. You know, I have never driven under the speed limit - mostly I have driven 15 to 20% over. Should I go to jail for that, too?

      I go to movies. I pay to go to the movies. Why do I have to sit through a 5 minute sermon on how evil piracy is when I paid to get there? Then again, when I buy a DVD, why the hell should I be FORCED to watch trailers and nowadays even ads? So I rip it, and get my right of choice back.

      While this code can be used to rip things and publish them on the internet, it's useful to me mostly to be able to see the movies I bought in the format I want. Call me a criminal if you will. I will call you a mindless consumer. Take what you're given and shut up. Leave those of us who want to DO something about the situation alone - when the REAL information revolution happens you'll have us to thank.

Re:I am not a number!

SirBruce (679714)

Umm ...

Re:Interference

even if script seems down.

it worked fine for me. My number is 503.

Re:Interference

That's strange... for some reason my number is 404...