Researchers at the University of Maryland’s A. James Clark School of Engineering are creating new digital fingerprinting technology that could help protect Hollywood’s assets and identify national security leak sources, all without impinging on legitimate uses.
We’ll skip the contradiction between Hollywood and legitimate use for now.
Min Wu and K.J. Ray Liu are developing innovative new “cyber forensics” technologies that will not only protect digital resources but also trace those who attempt to steal or misuse them through sophisticated “collusion attacks,” a common piracy method used by today’s cyber thieves. Collusion attacks occur when multiple users conspire to electronically steal and distribute copyrighted or classified material, diluting or erasing the original digital ID, or fingerprint, from the stolen multimedia content to avoid implication.
Wu and Liu’s new, interdisciplinary digital fingerprinting technology involves anti-collusion codes (ACC). ACC protects multimedia content without compromising the quality of the multimedia product or inhibiting legitimate uses.
Their new ACC fingerprinting performs much better than existing methods. Fingerprints can be extracted to help identify culprits when unauthorized duplication is attempted. The technology can be applied to images, video, audio, and special documents like maps. It can even be used to protect live multicasts, such as pay-per-view events. The system can accommodate up to millions of users, an especially important feature for satellite and Internet multimedia distribution.
Uh-huh. There’s a little more detail here in a .pdf.
Fingerprints can be extracted to help identify culprits when unauthorized duplication is attempted.
Interesting that they say “attempted” – implying whatever hardware/software you were using would phone home.
The brave new world of DRM on every “asset” we buy! [Assuming you buy it online].
Which begs the question: How much longer will we be able to buy “assets” off-line…? 🙂
The collective we are getting what we deserve.
No manufacturer and/or retailer wants to spend the time, money and energy for DRM or any kind of security or theft prevention systems. They do it because they believe they have to.
Do retailers want to use antitheft devices? I doubt it very much. They can be a pain to manage, you have lots of false postives, you usually have to pay for a guard by the sensors to check these false positves. But we all live with it and accept it because we know that shop lifting happens and is a real factor in the retail world.
In the digital world, where the shoplifting is very easy (and in many cases inadvertantly, or at least innocently done), DRM has to exist. Especially when the chance of getting caught is so small.
I’ve never heard a coherent answer to the proposition that digital theft is the same as shoplifting and should be treated alike. I’d love to hear from any of you DRM bad people.
OK Lou,
Not trying to be ignorant in any way here, but Fox’s and Sony’s root kits prove that there is no respect for the property or privacy of others at these companies. Add to that the potential for misuse of ANY gathered information and you will understand the anger. The security enclosure around a CD does not have access to your personal information, nor can it call and tell somebody what web pages you like to visit. The same goes for the security guard and the magnetic tag reader at the door. Reasonable people understand copy protection, only unreasonable people understand a need for spying on the American consumer.
Jason:
Sony’s lame attempts at DRM and copy protection does not prove anything. They are/were wrong, and just plain screwed up, but one shouldn’t indict every Intellectual Property holder for their messes.
If someone hurts someone by throwing them against a fence, the company that owns the fence/land should not be to blame. Sony put up a “defective” fence, and in my opinion, if anyone gets hurt, they are liable. But I think it would be wrong to react by saying, lets take down every fence in the world.
Most IP holders just want to make sure they are not denied revenue because of copying. It’s an arms race out there, and the crackers have access to the tools needed to break the DRM.
As for violations of privacy via DRM, or use of DRM for marketting reasons, personally I think its lame, but assuming the user CLEARLY, OPTS in to the scheme, its basically OK. Here, the business/software world deserves whatever crap they get for making their policies and opt-in-out agreements so difficult to understand, and so subject to change.
Most IP holders just want to make sure they are not denied revenue because of copying.
I have no complaints about that.
It’s an arms race out there, and the crackers have access to the tools needed to break the DRM.
Agreed.
Here in Portland, OR there has recently been the case of an employee of the Providence Health plan leaving a company laptop in their car, and having the laptop – containing personal data of 365,000 patients, including 250,000 Social Security numbers – stolen.
http://www.ihealthbeat.org/index.cfm?Action=dspItem&itemID=119058
How will “finger-printing” assets help identify the source of the pirating when false identities are so easy for criminals to obtain?
Co-incidentally, my ATM card was just blocked by my bank – because they spotted “suspicious” activity. They caught it so early, nothing unexpected has shown-up on my online statement.
So, I am not anti-theft or anti-fraud – I just think “finger-printing” files will work in a controlled environment – like government or corporate documents – but not for mass market items.
Jason & Lou,
Good dialogue. I think, however, that Wayne sums it up the best.
What sucks and should end is the fact that these people have no concept of FAIR USE.
via Pat/Wayne: “What sucks and should end is the fact that these people have no concept of FAIR USE.”
What really sucks even more is the 10’s of millions of people who used Napster, the people (at least in NYC) that pass by the street vendors selling bootleg DVD/CD’s, the billion or so people in the rest of the world who benefity from the fact that the governments believe IP ownership is irrelevant and patents/copyright is never honored. (I’m not talking about medicinal drugs here, we are talking about music and movies!!!!).
The guilty parties who have no concept of fair use (including everyone who ever had a illegal downloaded file, or copy of a friends CD) are not a very tiny fraction of the population. What do you think the percentage of people who violated fair use is (say in the U.S. under the age of 30)? I’d say it approaches 100% (remember, we are talking about 1 CD that’s a copy they didn’t buy, or one song they got from a friend via email, etc….).
Bottom line from this libertarian: It’s their party, they can cry if they want to… it’s their property, they can protect it and license it as they want to. If it is too onerus for me, they don’t get my $$$. It’s ENTERTAINMENT people, not water, oxygen, food. VOTE WITH YOUR WALLET, not by breaking the law.
it’s their property, they can protect it and license it as they want to. If it is too onerus for me, they don’t get my $$$. It’s ENTERTAINMENT people, not water, oxygen, food. VOTE WITH YOUR WALLET, not by breaking the law.
Agreed.
What bothers me is that I often can’t even vote – at least directly – due to the patch-work of DRM schemes.
i.e. Since I have been dumb enough [grin] to continue using Macs – since 1984 – I am effectively shut-out of any DRM scheme which depends on Windows. [Anyone not using Windows can also make that complaint]. And, Apple’s DRM only works on Macs and Windows, etc.
I can understand content owners wanting their assests to be as “safe” as CDs were before CD-R & MP3, and DVDs were before DeCSS & DVD-R, and anything was before the internet explosion.
So, I will be inerested in seeing people’s reactions to Blu-ray/HD DVD – with multiple software protections, and the requirement for HDCP in hardware, to be able to view protected content at HD-resolution.
It’s not that it can’t/won’t be cracked, but that it will not be as casual an undertaking as it is with current technology. Will the masses accept the limits, or vote against them [with their wallets]??