Windows Vista content protection (DRM)

[Rosuav]

This is a transcription and tidyup of a log of Trivia, on which I made all of the following points. It still has some of its conversational style, and occasionally it's somewhat disjoint, but hopefully it carries the bulk of the meaning.

Executive Executive Summary: The Vista Content Protection specification could very well constitute the longest suicide note in history.

Under a broad set of circumstances, Vista will require that the data sent to your screen must be encrypted. According to my calculations, you would need a *dedicated* 2GHz processor just to encrypt a standard image, 1024x768 64K colours. That's a pretty standard office setup. It's not what you'd watch high definition videos on. Standard refresh rates start at 60hz and go up - that is, the image on your screen is being redrawn sixty times a second. So it's being redrawn every 16 or 17 milliseconds. And a 2GHz chip needs 15.7 milliseconds to encrypt the amount of data needed for each refresh.

Either Vista is dead in the water, or everyone is going to succumb to Microsoft's monopoly, and pretty much surrender the entire computer industry to them.

Microsoft are pushing their monopoly really REALLY hard. Everyone has a choice. And the key to making the choice is.... what do you reckon the rest of the world will do.

Here's a fun little game to play. Everyone write down either the number zero or the number one, and give it to me without showing anyone. Whichever side got picked the most wins. And everyone who picked wrong will get killed. That's basically what Microsoft are offering. The players in this game are hardware manufacturers (making nice expensive video and sound cards), software developers (making playback software), movie makers, and end users.
[*] If nobody goes for it, Microsoft will be the only ones to lose out.[*] If everyone goes for it, Microsoft win big, but everyone's in the same boat.[*] If enough people go for it, though, those who DIDN'T are going to suffer big-time.

It's not as simple as just "guess where the majority's going to go". The Microsoft way can't actually win longterm. But I think MS has enough position to win short term at least.

"In order for Windows Vista's content protection to work, it has to be able to violate the laws of physics and create numerous copies that are simultaneously not copies." This (which doesn't make much sense to Tolegu, nor probably to many other people) basically means that Vista has specified certain requirements that are contrary to the laws of physics. And remember, the laws of physics aren't like the laws of the land. You can break American law, or Australian law, or whatever. You don't break the laws of physics... They. Break. You.

Long term, Vista will do everyone harm - hardware manufacturers, software developers, end users, movie makers - even Microsoft themselves. So why are they making it? Money? Yes, and also to maintain and enhance their stranglehold on the computer industry.

(Parenthesis: Tolegu asked for what reasons *anybody* makes software, other than for money. I responded that I write software to solve problems, and assured Abrianne that I often DO write it for free. Of course, that's not to say I wouldn't accept if someone decided to offer me money for Pigeon, or for RosMud++, or NetSem, or anything. But I give 'em away for nothing, because I've already gotten all the benefit I needed from them. My philosophy is this: If I need something enough to devote 'X' hours of work to writing it, then I do it. That's obvious. Having done so, if I can give that work to someone else without losing it myself and without incurring significant cost, then I do not need to charge them for it. Here endeth the parenthesis.)

Apparently data stored in memory is allowed to be unencrypted, but before it goes to disk it MUST be encrypted. So they're going to have to encrypt it before it goes into the page file. So there'll have to be a bit on every page of memory that says "0 - this page is normal, go ahead, swap it out" or "1 - this page is premium content, so before you swap it out, go to so much work that it's not worth swapping it out".

[Gesslar]

First, Apple's all about DRM lately too. It's just that they're not interested in playing nice with Microsoft.

And don't forget the Microsoft/Novel 10 year pact and promises not to sue each other or each other's customers. Also, they're each charged with writing client software to each to enable easy connectivity to each other.

DRM isn't dying soon, but it will die. Record companies are angry with Apple because they are inflexible about their $0.99 for every song and consumers are getting annoyed because they cannot move their media that they have paid for to other systems.

And I have no idea what sort of math you're using about encrypting/decrypting images being so CPU intensive when DVDs, video and audio can all be done quite easily at, well, anything faster than a static image.

I see some grey skies coming for MS too, but not in terms of what you're forshadowing.

What I see coming is that businesses and governments are FINALLY waking up to vendor lock-in in terms of their DATA. All of their data is tied to Office (incl. Outlook/Exchange). In order for them to continue business they -must- at this point continue with Office.

OpenDocument is an awesome bludgeon.

[Rosuav]

Originally posted by karahd
And I have no idea what sort of math you're using about encrypting/decrypting images being so CPU intensive when DVDs, video and audio can all be done quite easily at, well, anything faster than a static image.

One fact that I failed to mention there was that, according to a Microsoft memo (have to hunt the thing down, don't have it with me), the encryption algorithm they were demanding took 20 clocks per byte. That's what the calculations were based on.

[Grantref]

Your facts are incorrect, Rosuav. Vista only requires HDCP (High-Definition Copy Protection) in order to play HD-DVD and Blue-Ray Movies. As does Windows XP.

However, Microsoft is requiring that OEMs, in order to be granted the "Vista Premium Ready" certification must include HDCP functionality (specifically the superset of HDCP known as PVP, "Protected Video Path") in all non-integrated digital video outputs (i.e. video cards) by June 1, 2007, and in all integrated digital video outputs by June 1, 2008.

People who build their own PCs can use whatever hardware they see fit. OEMs who don't care about certification can use whatever hardware they see fit.

Of course, video card manufacturers and motherboard manufacturers are sure to begin adding HDCP to their video outputs (if they haven't already) in order to allow their wares to be used in Premium Ready computers.

Incidentally, the encryption is handled by special purpose chips in the video card and the monitor. It's generally not handled by the CPU, although I suppose drivers could be written for non-HDCP compliant video hardware that allows the HDCP to be done in software. Or maybe not. I'm no expert on the matter.

[leira]

And what if I want to play hddvd or blueray on my pc? All I -should- have to do is go out and buy a hddvd or blueray drive. My graphics card and monitor are plenty powerful enough to play hd movies. Except they can't, because they don't have the piracy prevention hardware built in to allow them to do so. I have to go out and buy a new video card and monitor that only has 1 "upgrade" over my current video card and monitor. That "upgrade" being that it prevents -myself- from pirating. I really don't consider that an upgrade.

I wasn't aware that XP has the same bullshit, but I guess it should have been obvious. No doubt Apple will be doing the same thing at some point. I felt strongly enough about this that I decided to switch over to Linux completely when I first read about this crap. I actually deleted Windows XP completely off my system a month or so back, and I'm glad I did. I am really unwilling to pay for 'upgrades' that are actually downgrades. Big companies are getting away with FAR too much shit when it comes to DRM, and this is way beyond the line of what I'm willing to tolerate. I'd rather use linux and potentially have no access to hddvd/blueray at all(though I find this EXTREMELY unlikely). Even if this kind of shit does become standard in linux somehow, at least I'm not paying for it.

Basically, even if I never played a hddvd or blueray movie in my entire lifespan, the presence of these ridiculous restrictions aggravates me enough that I'm not going to support it with my money.

[Gesslar]

If only you could apply for a MS Tax Refund.

[Rosuav]

Originally posted by Grantref
Your facts are incorrect, Rosuav. Vista only requires HDCP (High-Definition Copy Protection) in order to play HD-DVD and Blue-Ray Movies. As does Windows XP.

However, Microsoft is requiring that OEMs, in order to be granted the "Vista Premium Ready" certification must include HDCP functionality

Err... yeah. My bad. I oversimplified a bit here. Though there's the extra point here about Vista blurring out the image a bit when using non-certified hardware.

Incidentally, the encryption is handled by special purpose chips in the video card and the monitor. It's generally not handled by the CPU,

My point exactly. The extra special purpose chips would have to be roughly equivalent of a Pentium-4, with associated cost, power usage, and heat output. Not forgetting, too, that these chips are never going to get downtime unless the computer's really idle (ie screen signal switched off) - a hot 3D graphics card gets to shut most of itself down when you're not playing 3D graphics.

[Grantref]

Originally posted by leira
And what if I want to play hddvd or blueray on my pc? All I -should- have to do is go out and buy a hddvd or blueray drive. My graphics card and monitor are plenty powerful enough to play hd movies. Except they can't, because they don't have the piracy prevention hardware built in to allow them to do so. I have to go out and buy a new video card and monitor that only has 1 "upgrade" over my current video card and monitor. That "upgrade" being that it prevents -myself- from pirating. I really don't consider that an upgrade.

I wasn't aware that XP has the same bullshit, but I guess it should have been obvious. No doubt Apple will be doing the same thing at some point. I felt strongly enough about this that I decided to switch over to Linux completely when I first read about this crap. I actually deleted Windows XP completely off my system a month or so back, and I'm glad I did. I am really unwilling to pay for 'upgrades' that are actually downgrades. Big companies are getting away with FAR too much shit when it comes to DRM, and this is way beyond the line of what I'm willing to tolerate. I'd rather use linux and potentially have no access to hddvd/blueray at all(though I find this EXTREMELY unlikely). Even if this kind of shit does become standard in linux somehow, at least I'm not paying for it.

Basically, even if I never played a hddvd or blueray movie in my entire lifespan, the presence of these ridiculous restrictions aggravates me enough that I'm not going to support it with my money.

What the OS makers do is not really relevant to the subject. Blue-Ray won't play on digital output (DVI or HDMI) without HDCP. Ditto HD-DVD.

If you don't like it (and I certainly don't) then don't support them. View HD content through other means, that do not require HDCP, such as OTA HD broadcasts.

Originally posted by Rosuav
My point exactly. The extra special purpose chips would have to be roughly equivalent of a Pentium-4, with associated cost, power usage, and heat output. Not forgetting, too, that these chips are never going to get downtime unless the computer's really idle (ie screen signal switched off) - a hot 3D graphics card gets to shut most of itself down when you're not playing 3D graphics.

Oh come on, Rosuav. You're a programmer, don't you know that you can design a special-purpose chip to do a specific task (a specific type of decryption in this case) with a lot less overall processing power than a general-purpose CPU?

[Rosuav]

Originally posted by Grantref
Oh come on, Rosuav. You're a programmer, don't you know that you can design a special-purpose chip to do a specific task (a specific type of decryption in this case) with a lot less overall processing power than a general-purpose CPU?

When developing a statement for publication, it's a lot easier to say "equivalent of 2GHz Pentium-4" than to try to detail the actual requirements of the special-purpose chip - in any case, the cost savings by simplifying must be weighed against the cost savings of just taking an off-the-shelf component.

[Grantref]

Given that every HDMI-equipped set-top box, Upconverting DVD, Tivo, HDTV, and PS3 has a need for such an encryption/decryption chip, I would imagine that it pretty much would be an off the shelf component.

In fact, I don't have to imagine. Here's an example of one such chip: http://www.analog.com/en/prod/0,,765...D9887A,00.html

It runs $350 for a lot of 1000. Need to make any video cards?