16 ms·

yikes. having written aax plugins for a while, i have to say, i’m kind of surprised this came from AVID. from what it sounds like (having scraped the surface),

yikes. having written aax plugins for a while, i have to say, i’m kind of surprised this came from AVID. from what it sounds like (having scraped the surface), it’s not their editing software (Pro Tools, et al.) but their copy protection management tool/device driver - iLok. i’m sure there are some very anxious engineers in the AVID offices today.

dvfjsdhgfv 7y ago
> their copy protection management tool/device driver - iLok. They're still using that? These things were successfully cracked in the nineties, I was convinced nobody uses hardware dongles anymore.
- trynewideas 7y ago
  Buy your third-gen iLok today for only $49: https://www.avid.com/licenses/ilok https://www.avid.com/licenses/ilok
- adreamingsoul 7y ago
  yes, they are still an industry standard.
- lukeh 7y ago
  I believe the current generation is stronger.
- RealDinosaur 7y ago
  Oh, it's not just Avid. Some audio production software such as ReFX Nexus still uses a USB dongle. There is no way to use the software without it plugged in. It also has a policy where if you damage the dongle, you have to buy again and get a 10% discount off the FULL price of the VST. In the age of people gigging on laptops, I'm not entirely sure how they think they are gonna sell any more of them. I fancy it myself as it has quite a few 'familiar' sounds on it, but not with all the downsides.
  - episodeiv 7y ago
    To add to that, it's not just media production. In the medical field, almost all software for performing and analyzing EKGs, X-rays, MRIs etc. comes by default with some sort of dongle-based protection. Apparently, it's not enough that you need the biggest dongle in the world (i.e. the machine itself!) to use the software. Some vendors do offer alternatives if you fight them hard enough but the default still is a trip to dongle town.
    - tecleandor 7y ago
      Ah, but they need to control that CD recording device on the workstation, just in case you're handing out CDs to your patients WITHOUT A CD RECORDING LICENSE. They have the weirdest licenses.
      - stallmanite 7y ago
        So there is software on a medical device concerned with users copying a Billy Joel CD?
        tecleandor 7y ago
        They sell every functionality as an aditional "license" or "plugin". So, for example, it's not unusual that, by default, your half a million USD scanner, that includes a powerful workstation to control it (the one the technician uses behind the window) will only let you write CDs (for example, to give your patient a copy of his/her scan) if you pay an additional "CD Writing license" Now, with PACS and centralization that have changed a bit, but still...
        stallmanite 7y ago
        Thanks for the explanation. Still gross but not as bad as RIAA checks being performed somehow.
    - userbinator 7y ago
- hajhatten 7y ago
  Steinberg Cubase uses these aswell
  - NikkiA 7y ago
    Cubase uses eLicenser, not iLok, and it hasn't been cracked since a version about 10+ years ago so it does a pretty good job - even if that does mean cubase has fallen in popularity.
- tolien 7y ago
  The new Mac Pro tower has an internal USB-A port, explicitly for this reason [1]. 1: https://appleinsider.com/articles/19/06/04/apples-new-mac-pro-internal-components---answers-and-lingering-questions https://appleinsider.com/articles/19/06/04/apples-new-mac-pr...
  - justinjlynn 7y ago
    I look at what the industry has allowed itself become and cringe.
- SyneRyder 7y ago
  iLok doesn't require the hardware dongle anymore, licenses can be installed onto the hard drive now. Some people prefer the dongle because they can carry their licenses from machine to machine, studio to studio etc. But as a user, I still much prefer the old-school serial number unlock without internet activation, though.
  - unicornfinder 7y ago
    It depends - a lot of software still requires the hardware dongle and it's much more secure than the machine licensing option I'm told.
- unicornfinder 7y ago
  Actually the current generation of iLok hasn't been cracked yet (and from what I've heard it's unlikely that it ever will be). There was a time a few years ago when the wrapper got cracked but as far as I know the security itself is still strong.
flukus 7y ago
> but their copy protection management tool/device driver - iLok. Maybe Hollywood will learn that DRM hurts legitimate users. But they probably won't, I won't be shedding any tears either way.
- org3432 7y ago
  Ironically film tools have some of the most stringent copy protection systems, and big studios break the licenses agreements without hesitation when they need to get something done.
  - api 7y ago
    I wonder if Hollywood is so obsessed with DRM because they themselves are such f'ing pirates. The entire culture of Hollywood is around stealing (e.g. the endless so-and-so stole my script idea lawsuits) and defending oneself from having one's stuff stolen. Maybe they're projecting and imagining that everyone is constantly trying to steal everything. As a normal movie and TV viewer I will always look for an option to rent, buy, or stream stuff because I like to support the production of stuff I like and because the time it takes to jank around with pirated crap is generally worth more than the cost of just paying. The only time I've turned to piracy in recent (post-broke-college-kid) memory is when something is literally unavailable by any other means. I suspect I'm typical. DRM has zero effect on my behavior. If anything DRM encourages me to consider pirating because it adds pain and hassle. In the case of actual purchases (vs streaming and virtual renting) I really despise DRM since I purchased a copy and should be able to play it on any device I have and store it for posterity. I generally will not outright purchase DRMed content.
    - zerocrates 7y ago
      Since we're talking Hollywood, what's your success rate in being able to buy movies that don't have DRM? I can't think of any way to do that, really. Or are you saying that you basically can't, and therefore don't buy movies and instead stream or rent?
      - 7y ago
auslander 7y ago
> their copy protection management tool/device driver - iLok MacOS Catalina makes running kernel extensions hard, they probably were testing new iLok version for Catalina.
- rock_artist 7y ago
  Catalina major change is ANY dll should know pass through security. That's why notirisation also for software plug-ins is needed meaning also runtime hardening in future and proper entitlements by host and plug in
  - saagarjha 7y ago
    Your comment is a bit hard to parse. Would you mind clarifying it a bit?
    - rock_artist 7y ago
      I’ve started to write something but here is a good tl;dr - https://forums.developer.apple.com/thread/122566 https://forums.developer.apple.com/thread/122566
      - saagarjha 7y ago
        Right, Library Validation is tightened when you opt-in to Runtime Hardening.
- josteink 7y ago
  > MacOS Catalina makes running kernel extensions hard So it has bad compatibility? Is that a good thing which we’re excusing now?
lukeh 7y ago
OT, what plugins? I’m a keen Pro Tools user!
SyneRyder 7y ago
A few of the Twitter replies say they've seen it on non-AVID devices, which might lend more credence to the iLok theory. https://twitter.com/FamousJerry/status/1176422298535940097 https://twitter.com/FamousJerry/status/1176422298535940097 I'm kinda hoping iLok is the culprit, because I've been refusing to buy any plugins that require iLok, even though that means avoiding some effects I'd really love to have & developers that I'd love to support. Thankfully iLok is optional for the iZotope stuff...
- femto113 7y ago
  The iLok is just a repository of keys and can’t hurt anything by itself. It’s communicated with by code either built into a license protected application or in a “wrapper” added to an otherwise unprotected app. Pace AP (maker of the software and reseller of the iLok) is essentially in a never ending arms race with the warez crowd, and in the past has resorted to some gray-hat, rootkit-like techniques to prevent cracking. It wouldn’t surprise me if this was either some old Pace code going rotten or some sort of crack gone viral/rogue. I used to develop an iLok protected app and am still on their developer mailing list, but note that I haven’t seen any recent alerts from them so it’s entirety possible it’s something else.
  - SyneRyder 7y ago
    Yep, after I posted I realized that if this is really widespread & iLok related, surely someone would have posted on Gearslutz complaining about it by now. So far I can't find any threads about it there. In my iLok case years ago, it was a problem with the iLok KEXT kernel extension drivers causing my Mac to kernel panic at startup that put me off. That would've been around the Mac OS X 10.5 / 10.6 era.
pier25 7y ago
I bought a plugin from UVI and had to use iLok for the first time recently and the experience was atrocious. Not only that, if you want to sell and transfer your iLok license you have to pay $20. I will never buy anything that requires iLok.
- cheeze 7y ago
  Ironically, the folks pirating the software didn't run into any interruption because there is no iLok
  - holy_city 7y ago
    iLok has been extremely effective at stopping cracks or at least slowing them down enough to where the software is obsolete by the time a crack appears. The pirates don't have access to this software in the first place. We can debate the merits of DRM all we want, but PACE's stuff actually works (at stopping pirates, and sometimes paying users)
- leetrout 7y ago
  It is truly a cancer and the worst part about using Avid tools. I wish they would get rid of it.

dvfjsdhgfv 7y ago

> their copy protection management tool/device driver - iLok. They're still using that? These things were successfully cracked in the nineties, I was convinced nobody uses hardware dongles anymore.

trynewideas 7y ago
Buy your third-gen iLok today for only $49: https://www.avid.com/licenses/ilok https://www.avid.com/licenses/ilok
adreamingsoul 7y ago
yes, they are still an industry standard.
lukeh 7y ago
I believe the current generation is stronger.
RealDinosaur 7y ago
Oh, it's not just Avid. Some audio production software such as ReFX Nexus still uses a USB dongle. There is no way to use the software without it plugged in. It also has a policy where if you damage the dongle, you have to buy again and get a 10% discount off the FULL price of the VST. In the age of people gigging on laptops, I'm not entirely sure how they think they are gonna sell any more of them. I fancy it myself as it has quite a few 'familiar' sounds on it, but not with all the downsides.
- episodeiv 7y ago
  To add to that, it's not just media production. In the medical field, almost all software for performing and analyzing EKGs, X-rays, MRIs etc. comes by default with some sort of dongle-based protection. Apparently, it's not enough that you need the biggest dongle in the world (i.e. the machine itself!) to use the software. Some vendors do offer alternatives if you fight them hard enough but the default still is a trip to dongle town.
  - tecleandor 7y ago
    Ah, but they need to control that CD recording device on the workstation, just in case you're handing out CDs to your patients WITHOUT A CD RECORDING LICENSE. They have the weirdest licenses.
    - stallmanite 7y ago
      So there is software on a medical device concerned with users copying a Billy Joel CD?
      - tecleandor 7y ago
        They sell every functionality as an aditional "license" or "plugin". So, for example, it's not unusual that, by default, your half a million USD scanner, that includes a powerful workstation to control it (the one the technician uses behind the window) will only let you write CDs (for example, to give your patient a copy of his/her scan) if you pay an additional "CD Writing license" Now, with PACS and centralization that have changed a bit, but still...
        stallmanite 7y ago
        Thanks for the explanation. Still gross but not as bad as RIAA checks being performed somehow.
  - userbinator 7y ago
hajhatten 7y ago
Steinberg Cubase uses these aswell
- NikkiA 7y ago
  Cubase uses eLicenser, not iLok, and it hasn't been cracked since a version about 10+ years ago so it does a pretty good job - even if that does mean cubase has fallen in popularity.
tolien 7y ago
The new Mac Pro tower has an internal USB-A port, explicitly for this reason [1]. 1: https://appleinsider.com/articles/19/06/04/apples-new-mac-pro-internal-components---answers-and-lingering-questions https://appleinsider.com/articles/19/06/04/apples-new-mac-pr...
- justinjlynn 7y ago
  I look at what the industry has allowed itself become and cringe.
SyneRyder 7y ago
iLok doesn't require the hardware dongle anymore, licenses can be installed onto the hard drive now. Some people prefer the dongle because they can carry their licenses from machine to machine, studio to studio etc. But as a user, I still much prefer the old-school serial number unlock without internet activation, though.
- unicornfinder 7y ago
  It depends - a lot of software still requires the hardware dongle and it's much more secure than the machine licensing option I'm told.
unicornfinder 7y ago
Actually the current generation of iLok hasn't been cracked yet (and from what I've heard it's unlikely that it ever will be). There was a time a few years ago when the wrapper got cracked but as far as I know the security itself is still strong.

flukus 7y ago

> but their copy protection management tool/device driver - iLok. Maybe Hollywood will learn that DRM hurts legitimate users. But they probably won't, I won't be shedding any tears either way.

org3432 7y ago
Ironically film tools have some of the most stringent copy protection systems, and big studios break the licenses agreements without hesitation when they need to get something done.
- api 7y ago
  I wonder if Hollywood is so obsessed with DRM because they themselves are such f'ing pirates. The entire culture of Hollywood is around stealing (e.g. the endless so-and-so stole my script idea lawsuits) and defending oneself from having one's stuff stolen. Maybe they're projecting and imagining that everyone is constantly trying to steal everything. As a normal movie and TV viewer I will always look for an option to rent, buy, or stream stuff because I like to support the production of stuff I like and because the time it takes to jank around with pirated crap is generally worth more than the cost of just paying. The only time I've turned to piracy in recent (post-broke-college-kid) memory is when something is literally unavailable by any other means. I suspect I'm typical. DRM has zero effect on my behavior. If anything DRM encourages me to consider pirating because it adds pain and hassle. In the case of actual purchases (vs streaming and virtual renting) I really despise DRM since I purchased a copy and should be able to play it on any device I have and store it for posterity. I generally will not outright purchase DRMed content.
  - zerocrates 7y ago
    Since we're talking Hollywood, what's your success rate in being able to buy movies that don't have DRM? I can't think of any way to do that, really. Or are you saying that you basically can't, and therefore don't buy movies and instead stream or rent?
    - 7y ago

auslander 7y ago

> their copy protection management tool/device driver - iLok MacOS Catalina makes running kernel extensions hard, they probably were testing new iLok version for Catalina.

rock_artist 7y ago
Catalina major change is ANY dll should know pass through security. That's why notirisation also for software plug-ins is needed meaning also runtime hardening in future and proper entitlements by host and plug in
- saagarjha 7y ago
  Your comment is a bit hard to parse. Would you mind clarifying it a bit?
  - rock_artist 7y ago
    I’ve started to write something but here is a good tl;dr - https://forums.developer.apple.com/thread/122566 https://forums.developer.apple.com/thread/122566
    - saagarjha 7y ago
      Right, Library Validation is tightened when you opt-in to Runtime Hardening.
josteink 7y ago
> MacOS Catalina makes running kernel extensions hard So it has bad compatibility? Is that a good thing which we’re excusing now?

lukeh 7y ago

OT, what plugins? I’m a keen Pro Tools user!

SyneRyder 7y ago

A few of the Twitter replies say they've seen it on non-AVID devices, which might lend more credence to the iLok theory. https://twitter.com/FamousJerry/status/1176422298535940097 https://twitter.com/FamousJerry/status/1176422298535940097 I'm kinda hoping iLok is the culprit, because I've been refusing to buy any plugins that require iLok, even though that means avoiding some effects I'd really love to have & developers that I'd love to support. Thankfully iLok is optional for the iZotope stuff...

femto113 7y ago
The iLok is just a repository of keys and can’t hurt anything by itself. It’s communicated with by code either built into a license protected application or in a “wrapper” added to an otherwise unprotected app. Pace AP (maker of the software and reseller of the iLok) is essentially in a never ending arms race with the warez crowd, and in the past has resorted to some gray-hat, rootkit-like techniques to prevent cracking. It wouldn’t surprise me if this was either some old Pace code going rotten or some sort of crack gone viral/rogue. I used to develop an iLok protected app and am still on their developer mailing list, but note that I haven’t seen any recent alerts from them so it’s entirety possible it’s something else.
- SyneRyder 7y ago
  Yep, after I posted I realized that if this is really widespread & iLok related, surely someone would have posted on Gearslutz complaining about it by now. So far I can't find any threads about it there. In my iLok case years ago, it was a problem with the iLok KEXT kernel extension drivers causing my Mac to kernel panic at startup that put me off. That would've been around the Mac OS X 10.5 / 10.6 era.

pier25 7y ago

I bought a plugin from UVI and had to use iLok for the first time recently and the experience was atrocious. Not only that, if you want to sell and transfer your iLok license you have to pay $20. I will never buy anything that requires iLok.

cheeze 7y ago
Ironically, the folks pirating the software didn't run into any interruption because there is no iLok
- holy_city 7y ago
  iLok has been extremely effective at stopping cracks or at least slowing them down enough to where the software is obsolete by the time a crack appears. The pirates don't have access to this software in the first place. We can debate the merits of DRM all we want, but PACE's stuff actually works (at stopping pirates, and sometimes paying users)
leetrout 7y ago
It is truly a cancer and the worst part about using Avid tools. I wish they would get rid of it.