4 ms·

Are you telling me it's illegal to reverse engineer [DRM] software that I paid for and installed on my PC? That's like making it illegal to open the bonnet of

Are you telling me it's illegal to reverse engineer [DRM] software that I paid for and installed on my PC? That's like making it illegal to open the bonnet of my car and take the engine apart. Or are you saying it's illegal to build a crack using my private computer? Or are you just saying it's illegal to publish that crack?

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
ev1 6y ago
From a legal risk POV, yes, assuming US-based. It is not fair use at all, either. CFAA and DMCA are quite nasty in this regard. It gets significantly worse if, in the course of your inspection/EULA violation/whatever, you have to interact with any third party DRM [online] services for authn/authz. Then you bring even more crime into scope. Ianal, but I'm fairly certain the answer is 'yes' to every single question, even individually (the act of cracking and the act of publishing it might even be two separate crimes) EFF: > The anti-circumvention provisions of the DMCA, 17 U.S.C. 1201, prohibit circumvention of “technological protection measures” that effectively control access to copyrighted works. The law also prohibits trafficking in tools that are primarily designed for circumvention, have only limited commercially significant purpose other than circumvention or are marketed for circumvention. While section 1201 can arguably apply to any security researcher, those studying digital rights management (DRM) of music, movies or other creative content are most likely to face section 1201 claims, since Congress intended to protect these copyrighted works when it passed the statute. Researchers looking for vulnerabilities in authentication handshakes, code signing, code obfuscation, and protocol encryption also have to worry about section 1201 because vendors have argued that these also qualify as “technical protection measures” covered by the DMCA.
- pfundstein 6y ago
  Right so how could they possibly define/prove/enforce it, since reverse engineering is essentially the act of understanding how something works by looking at it.
  - Benjamin_Dobell 6y ago
    There are examples of this specific provision of the DMCA being enforced (or at the very least being used to threaten into submission) on EFF's website. Dmitry Sklyarov, a Russian national, was even arrested and sent to jail in the US: https://www.eff.org/pages/unintended-consequences-fifteen-years-under-dmca https://www.eff.org/pages/unintended-consequences-fifteen-ye... EDIT: Probably worth noting Dmitry Sklyarov was released from jail after testifying at the trial of his employer, who were themselves then found not guilty of violating the DMCA.
- Dylan16807 6y ago
  > It is not fair use at all, either. Fair use is a copyright term, so let's be more specific: Even when you're cracking DRM to enable copyright fair use, the act of cracking will typically be illegal.
fulafel 6y ago
Criminally illegal.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

ev1 6y ago

From a legal risk POV, yes, assuming US-based. It is not fair use at all, either. CFAA and DMCA are quite nasty in this regard. It gets significantly worse if, in the course of your inspection/EULA violation/whatever, you have to interact with any third party DRM [online] services for authn/authz. Then you bring even more crime into scope. Ianal, but I'm fairly certain the answer is 'yes' to every single question, even individually (the act of cracking and the act of publishing it might even be two separate crimes) EFF: > The anti-circumvention provisions of the DMCA, 17 U.S.C. 1201, prohibit circumvention of “technological protection measures” that effectively control access to copyrighted works. The law also prohibits trafficking in tools that are primarily designed for circumvention, have only limited commercially significant purpose other than circumvention or are marketed for circumvention. While section 1201 can arguably apply to any security researcher, those studying digital rights management (DRM) of music, movies or other creative content are most likely to face section 1201 claims, since Congress intended to protect these copyrighted works when it passed the statute. Researchers looking for vulnerabilities in authentication handshakes, code signing, code obfuscation, and protocol encryption also have to worry about section 1201 because vendors have argued that these also qualify as “technical protection measures” covered by the DMCA.

pfundstein 6y ago
Right so how could they possibly define/prove/enforce it, since reverse engineering is essentially the act of understanding how something works by looking at it.
- Benjamin_Dobell 6y ago
  There are examples of this specific provision of the DMCA being enforced (or at the very least being used to threaten into submission) on EFF's website. Dmitry Sklyarov, a Russian national, was even arrested and sent to jail in the US: https://www.eff.org/pages/unintended-consequences-fifteen-years-under-dmca https://www.eff.org/pages/unintended-consequences-fifteen-ye... EDIT: Probably worth noting Dmitry Sklyarov was released from jail after testifying at the trial of his employer, who were themselves then found not guilty of violating the DMCA.
Dylan16807 6y ago
> It is not fair use at all, either. Fair use is a copyright term, so let's be more specific: Even when you're cracking DRM to enable copyright fair use, the act of cracking will typically be illegal.

fulafel 6y ago

Criminally illegal.