Positive developments for Blu-ray

[one]

The whole point of SPDC/BD+ is that the copy protection system is embedded in the media itself and is controlled by the studios, not the hardware developers.

The SPDC/BD+ describes the virtual machine and the infrastructure that the protection system runs in, not the protection mechanisms themselves. So the studios are free to invent whatever non-standard protection checks and encryption methods they want -- which effectively means EVERY disc will have a non-standard protection technology -- otherwise the whole point of SPDC/BD+ is defeated.

In any case, regardless of how good the QA standards are, some players will get released that have bugs in them or do not implement some things correctly, especially at launch. Problems happened with the much simpler DVD spec and it'd be foolish to think the same won't happen with BD or HD DVD.

Citing the simpler DVD spec to explain the difficulty of BD+ sounds strange as AACS is already much more complicated than CSS anyway.

My impression is that unless it's detected that a player is tampered BD+ is not activated in the first place as it's just a fail-safe solution. Hardware manufacturers don't care about QA standards as it's the responsibility of media manufacturers to take care of new protection code that run on VM. Media manufacturers who don't want to take the risk of bugs won't add BD+ code to disc, period.

http://www.blu-raydisc.com/assets/downloadablefile/050809-13034.pdf

The BDA also adopted "BD+", a Blu-ray Disc specific programmable renewability enhancement that gives content providers an additional means to respond to organized attacks on the security system by allowing dynamic updates of compromised code. With these enhancements, content providers have a number of methods to choose from to combat hacks on Blu-ray players. Moreover, BD+ affects only players that have been attacked, as opposed to those that are vulnerable but haven't been attacked and therefore continue to operate properly.

 

[Arty]

It would seem quite easy for you to verify those sources and claims should you choose to do so.

WSJ needs a subscription, which is why I asked for its validity. Is that wrong or am I supposed to be a subscriber to everything that is out on the intraweb ?

Why do I have the feeling you have an in-built 'selective skepticism' mechanism?

Because I dont have the some hidden love for Sony or Microsoft unlike some people here. :|

 

[Carl B]

LOL, well fair enough.

But anyway yeah, the site's legit and the article is 'real.' I agree that site subscriptions are a hassle, but WSJ's gotta make a dollar after all! Which is of course why it's a benefit when 'premium' news is reported on by an ad-supported (ie free) site.

 

[randycat99]

Because I dont have the some hidden love for Sony or Microsoft unlike some people here. :|

The funny thing is that we are not obliged to believe you on that, without the corraboration of an independent news source. I think your post history (good or bad) will speak more to that subject than any claim you could give us.

 

[aaaaa00]

Citing the simpler DVD spec to explain the difficulty of BD+ sounds strange as AACS is already much more complicated than CSS anyway.

You're asking BD players to implement AACS and then in addition implement SPDC/BD+ which is even more complicated than AACS? And you're not expecting even more bugs?

My impression is that unless it's detected that a player is tampered BD+ is not activated in the first place as it's just a fail-safe solution.

There is no way that SPDC can be just a fail-safe solution. For a SPDC/BD+ protected disk, the SPDC/BD+ code module will have to be the only way to decrypt the movie, otherwise the whole point of SPDC/BD+ is defeated.

Whether or not SPDC/BD+ will be used on disks, at least initially, is harder to say. If SPDC/BD+ is not used on initial discs, you can bet there will be bugs in early implementations, since the implementations will probably not be as mature and tested as well.

I'm not saying this is impossible, but I think it will be a challenge to do.

 

[Arty]

The funny thing is that we are not obliged to believe you on that, without the corraboration of an independent news source. I think your post history (good or bad) will speak more to that subject than any claim you could give us.

Be my guest.