Nikon's RAW photo encryption broken… twice
posted April 22nd 2005 8:30AM
As noted in the comments about Nikon's highly inadvisable decision to encrypt its RAW files, Bibble Labs has cracked the Nikon white balance encryption in the latest version of its imaging software. Now programmer Dave Coffin has also reverse-engineered the encryption and has published the decryption code on his website, intending to make Nikon's RAW a completely open format. Coffin hopes his work will allow Adobe to support Nikon's file format in future versions of their Camera Raw software, but Adobe is still understandably hesitant about drawing a possible lawsuit under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA). Plus, the question still remains regarding whether much can be done to salvage the betrayed trust Nikon visited on its customers by opting to encrypt its RAW files in the first place.
Doh! I can't remember where I saw it, but it was a very good commentary on why Nikon might have taken this simplistic approach to encryption of the white balance data. It keeps Adobe from being able to sell RAW support for PhotoShop via some kind of plugin. But I can't remember what the advantage was for Nikon. Something about native support in PhotoShop. Maybe it makes Adobe come to Nikon on bent knee and Nikon can dictate some terms.
Rats!
"Coffin hopes his work will allow Adobe to support Nikons file format in future versions of their Camera Raw software"
What the fuck, the encryption had already been cracked by Bibble ( http://www.bibblelabs.com/ ), and Adobe isn't including it for legal reasons, not because they were incapable of cracking it themselves.
This was never a technical issue. Nikon is trying to make some extra cash by forcing people to 'license' their decrypting algorithms because the DMCA makes it illegal to include circumvent these algorithms on HARDWARE YOU OWN AND PICTURES YOU TOOK.
They're fucking consumers in the ass and charging them for the privilage.
I was gonna recommend to my dad to get the new D50 but when I heard about this encryption stuff I went out and got a Canon instead. Thanks for making the decision easy Nikon!
If you look at what professional photographers are saying on other websites, this is a non-issue. Nikon's white balance plug-in is *significantly* better than others that are available for Photoshop. In other words, there's no reason you wouldn't use Nikon's plug-in, meaning, there's no encryption issue.
The other thing is, how the camera interprets what it gets off the CCD *is* proprietary -- it's what separates one camera from another. I see no problem with Nikon protecting that.
Amen to Wayne's comments...everyone's getting all sorts of huffy about nada.
I will refrain from spurting tears, anime-style, for Adobe. It was Adobe, several years ago, that had a programmer arrested for bypassing the pitiful encryption on their E-Reader software (and thereby running afoul of the DMCA).
http://www.freesklyarov.org/
That Adobe is refraining from bypassing the encryption Nikon has implemented simply shows that they know the public will have little tolerance for hypocrisy.
"how the camera interprets what it gets off the CCD *is* proprietary"
This has got to be one of the dumbest and most absurd statements I've ever read. It is pure sophistry. It's laughable that the writer can't see the distinction between the tool and the product of that tool.
And thank you Wayne and Nikon for deciding for photographers everywhere that Nikon products are the best and so no one should be upset if you're forced to use it. My personal preference and judgment bow down before you.
And I don't know what "professional" websites you're looking at but pros are up in arms over this, as they should be. Check out www.robgalbraith.com if you want to read pissed off pros.
So what if Nikon's tool is the best right now. Will it be the best in a couple years? How about in 20 years when I try to publish archival prints....