5 ms·

If a compromised account was used, presumably the server logs will show an unusual access pattern on that account, in particular involving the content that has

If a compromised account was used, presumably the server logs will show an unusual access pattern on that account, in particular involving the content that has leaked being accessed from an unusual location. And then presumably the person whose account was used will have to make a convincing case that they shouldn't be held responsible for access using their credentials anyway.

flukus 10y ago
Ok, what if a machine is compromised (there are millions of zombie boxes out there)? Someone can gain access, do their stuff and then upload the result. Are they going to start suing grandmas with weak wifi passwords? That worked so well for the RIAA last time.
- Silhouette 10y ago
  Then it'll be up to the person whose account was accessed to provide some evidence that something like this happened and that it wasn't their fault. That's how these things work. You go to court, you make your case and the other side makes theirs, and the court draws its conclusions and acts accordingly. However, you don't just get to conveniently avoid taking any responsibility when there are videos being distributed that are specifically linked to an account you signed up for that clearly said you couldn't redistribute the content you got through it, just because there's some vaguely possible alternative that might have once happened somewhere maybe.
  - boomboomsubban 10y ago
    A compromised account is a vague possibility? I'm not amazing at these things, but I could probably access a WiFi network unconnected to me, mask my IP to a different location, and acquire a random Netflix account in a couple of hours. These things are likely, and wrongful lawsuits greatly damage the company while successful ones provide a minimal benefit.
    - Silhouette 10y ago
      I'm not amazing at these things, but I could probably access a WiFi network unconnected to me, mask my IP to a different location, and acquire a random Netflix account in a couple of hours. Really? How would you do that, exactly? If you're looking online and find camcorder copies of videos that were served to a specific customer at a specific time, as confirmed by the watermarking, and your server logs show that that stream was sent to the customer's usual IP address at the time in question, what are the odds that they were the victim of a carefully crafted hack of the kind you're implying, and not just someone who set up a camcorder to record from their own account?
      - flukus 10y ago
        > Really? How would you do that, exactly? Wireless isn't very secure, you're mileage may vary on the encryption mechanism but here is a guide to hacking WPA networks (with WEP it takes seconds): http://www.hackingtutorials.org/wifi-hacking-tutorials/how-to-hack-upc-wireless-networks/ http://www.hackingtutorials.org/wifi-hacking-tutorials/how-t... From there you can try a range of known exploits and gain admin access to a PC, after that it's game over, they can run what they want, when the want. There is no careful crafting necessary, the process can be largely automated. We aren't talking camcorder copies, but exact digital replicas from the netflix stream.
        Silhouette 10y ago
        WPA2 is reasonably secure and has been the standard for home and business WiFi for years. In any case, merely compromising WiFi won't get you someone's Netflix account. The Netflix data itself, including the credentials, are all encrypted. As for taking over someone's PC, that's far beyond the average pirate, and you're talking about serious criminal offences on top of mere copyright infringement at that point. And even then, we're not necessarily talking about being able to make exact copies of the stream. The whole point of hardware-backed DRM schemes is that just because you can run software on the PC, that doesn't mean you can access the unencrypted data stream. So again, how exactly were you planning to do this? What you're talking about is far beyond the average script kiddie or casual pirate. Remember, we were talking about convincing a court that it was more likely that someone did all of this and that was how a watermarked copy of protected content got out than that the person whose account was used to download that content then somehow shared it. A slight possibility that professional pirates who are also expert crackers chose that particular customer to pick on and left no evidence having done so isn't likely to be very convincing.
  - flukus 10y ago
    > That's how these things work. You go to court, you make your case and the other side makes theirs, and the court draws its conclusions and acts accordingly. Currently the burden of evidence is far too low. Something being done with my account, or even my machine is not evidence that I've done anything wrong. > However, you don't just get to conveniently avoid taking any responsibility when there are videos being distributed that are specifically linked to an account you signed up for that clearly said you couldn't redistribute the content you got through it How are we supposed to take responsibility for the actions of others? Should we be liable for crimes committed due to the insecurity of home networks? If so the computer industry has much bigger problems than DRM.
    - Silhouette 10y ago
      Something being done with my account, or even my machine is not evidence that I've done anything wrong. Yes, it is. It may not be absolute proof, but it most certainly is strong evidence. How are we supposed to take responsibility for the actions of others? Hopefully, you don't have to. But you also don't get to just invent some hypothetical bogeyman and use that as an excuse to ignore real evidence.

flukus 10y ago

Ok, what if a machine is compromised (there are millions of zombie boxes out there)? Someone can gain access, do their stuff and then upload the result. Are they going to start suing grandmas with weak wifi passwords? That worked so well for the RIAA last time.

Silhouette 10y ago
Then it'll be up to the person whose account was accessed to provide some evidence that something like this happened and that it wasn't their fault. That's how these things work. You go to court, you make your case and the other side makes theirs, and the court draws its conclusions and acts accordingly. However, you don't just get to conveniently avoid taking any responsibility when there are videos being distributed that are specifically linked to an account you signed up for that clearly said you couldn't redistribute the content you got through it, just because there's some vaguely possible alternative that might have once happened somewhere maybe.
- boomboomsubban 10y ago
  A compromised account is a vague possibility? I'm not amazing at these things, but I could probably access a WiFi network unconnected to me, mask my IP to a different location, and acquire a random Netflix account in a couple of hours. These things are likely, and wrongful lawsuits greatly damage the company while successful ones provide a minimal benefit.
  - Silhouette 10y ago
    I'm not amazing at these things, but I could probably access a WiFi network unconnected to me, mask my IP to a different location, and acquire a random Netflix account in a couple of hours. Really? How would you do that, exactly? If you're looking online and find camcorder copies of videos that were served to a specific customer at a specific time, as confirmed by the watermarking, and your server logs show that that stream was sent to the customer's usual IP address at the time in question, what are the odds that they were the victim of a carefully crafted hack of the kind you're implying, and not just someone who set up a camcorder to record from their own account?
    - flukus 10y ago
      > Really? How would you do that, exactly? Wireless isn't very secure, you're mileage may vary on the encryption mechanism but here is a guide to hacking WPA networks (with WEP it takes seconds): http://www.hackingtutorials.org/wifi-hacking-tutorials/how-to-hack-upc-wireless-networks/ http://www.hackingtutorials.org/wifi-hacking-tutorials/how-t... From there you can try a range of known exploits and gain admin access to a PC, after that it's game over, they can run what they want, when the want. There is no careful crafting necessary, the process can be largely automated. We aren't talking camcorder copies, but exact digital replicas from the netflix stream.
      - Silhouette 10y ago
        WPA2 is reasonably secure and has been the standard for home and business WiFi for years. In any case, merely compromising WiFi won't get you someone's Netflix account. The Netflix data itself, including the credentials, are all encrypted. As for taking over someone's PC, that's far beyond the average pirate, and you're talking about serious criminal offences on top of mere copyright infringement at that point. And even then, we're not necessarily talking about being able to make exact copies of the stream. The whole point of hardware-backed DRM schemes is that just because you can run software on the PC, that doesn't mean you can access the unencrypted data stream. So again, how exactly were you planning to do this? What you're talking about is far beyond the average script kiddie or casual pirate. Remember, we were talking about convincing a court that it was more likely that someone did all of this and that was how a watermarked copy of protected content got out than that the person whose account was used to download that content then somehow shared it. A slight possibility that professional pirates who are also expert crackers chose that particular customer to pick on and left no evidence having done so isn't likely to be very convincing.
- flukus 10y ago
  > That's how these things work. You go to court, you make your case and the other side makes theirs, and the court draws its conclusions and acts accordingly. Currently the burden of evidence is far too low. Something being done with my account, or even my machine is not evidence that I've done anything wrong. > However, you don't just get to conveniently avoid taking any responsibility when there are videos being distributed that are specifically linked to an account you signed up for that clearly said you couldn't redistribute the content you got through it How are we supposed to take responsibility for the actions of others? Should we be liable for crimes committed due to the insecurity of home networks? If so the computer industry has much bigger problems than DRM.
  - Silhouette 10y ago
    Something being done with my account, or even my machine is not evidence that I've done anything wrong. Yes, it is. It may not be absolute proof, but it most certainly is strong evidence. How are we supposed to take responsibility for the actions of others? Hopefully, you don't have to. But you also don't get to just invent some hypothetical bogeyman and use that as an excuse to ignore real evidence.