SlySoft's latest AnyDVD beta cracks BD+

Regardless of what those oh-so-knowledgeable analysts had to say, we all knew this day was coming. Yep, that highly-touted, totally "impenetrable" copy protection technology known as BD+ has officially been brought to its knees, and it's not at all surprising to hear that we have SlySoft to thank. The AnyDVD 6.1.9.6 beta has quite a comical change log too, and aside from noting that users now have the ability to backup their BD+ movies and watch titles sans the need for HDCP-compliant equipment, it also includes a candid note to Twentieth Century Fox informing the studio that its prior assumptions about BD+'s effectiveness were apparently incorrect. You know the drill, hit the read link below to try 'er out.

[Thanks, Aaron]

[Jeremy K. @ Nov 7th 2007 9:36PM]

Cool! Now I don't have to worry about buying an HDCP compatible video card, although many of them are nowadays.

[LondonConsultant @ Nov 7th 2007 10:00PM]

I suspect that SlySoft's current solution merely exploits an error in current implementations of BD+. Expect future implementations to close this particular exploit, but SlySoft will no doubt then find other exploits...

[why not the LS2LS7? @ Nov 7th 2007 10:16PM]

BD+ is fully reprogrammable. Basically, a program runs on your player as the disc plays, and the program can modify the video stream as it plays. If you don't run the program, the video is corrupt.

I would expect the current SlySoft break just works around the current program running on BD+ discs, and new discs will come out with revised programs that counter the SlySoft break.

But in the end, it's impossible for the content providers to revise their programs faster than SlySoft can counter them. As long as SlySoft exists, BD+ will never be truly effective.

[I LOVE THE CAPS LOCK KEY @ Nov 7th 2007 11:59PM]

09-f9-11-02-9d-74-e3-5b-d8-41-56-c5-63-56-88-c0

[Kurian @ Nov 8th 2007 5:36AM]

The decryption key is ALWAYS present, regardless of any hitech crap.

[why not the LS2LS7? @ Nov 7th 2007 9:38PM]

I am asking slysoft for a refund of my AnyDVD fees.

I didn't pay them money to be lectured on my choice of HD disc format. Especially by someone deluded enough to think that HD DVD members aren't taking away my fair use rights. If HD-DVD weren't trying to take away my fair use rights, AnyDVD wouldn't be needed for HD-DVD, and yet it is. Did he forget the AACS key being changed?

HD-DVD paid $100M to companies to DEGRADE the consumer experience and not release their content on another format. Sorry, that makes them bad guys too, SlySoft.

[Luke @ Nov 7th 2007 9:45PM]

you are such a martyr... thank you for standing up to a readme file.

[why not the LS2LS7? @ Nov 7th 2007 9:49PM]

Damn dude, that was hilarious. You could open for Carrot Top on his next tour.

[Jesse @ Nov 7th 2007 9:59PM]

Wow, I mean, wow...

What can I say? Wow...

Wow...

[Deuz Augustine @ Nov 7th 2007 10:31PM]

"you are such a martyr... thank you for standing up to a readme file."

This is the best post I have EVER seen on this site.

[Andrew @ Nov 7th 2007 10:37PM]

Get down off your cross, use the wood to build a bridge, and get over it.

[why not the LS2LS7? @ Nov 7th 2007 10:46PM]

I'm sure you think the cross comments are funny, but the way capitalism works, I have to vote with my dollars. Companies don't understand anything else.

You think I'm acting like a martyr but what I'm really doing is using my own money to protect my own interests above those of companies as much as I can.

[Reader @ Nov 7th 2007 10:57PM]

Seriously? Uhm I'm just going to assume you're joking, because otherwise life ceases to make sense...

[Rob @ Nov 7th 2007 11:31PM]

im not 100% sure, but i think "why not the LS2/LS7?" is going for the most negative rated posts in one story.

[why not the LS2LS7? @ Nov 8th 2007 2:50AM]

Trust me when I say I don't give a crap about comment ratings.

[Luke @ Nov 7th 2007 9:56PM]

Damn dude, nice comeback. But I wouldn't try to be funny while you are still up on that cross.

[why not the LS2LS7? @ Nov 7th 2007 10:06PM]

I paid $30 to slysoft last week specifically to get the ability to rip BD+ discs. These are BluRay discs.

And now SlySoft is taking the money us BD people are paying them for and using it to try to undercut our choice of format? It's unjust. And add on top of that the fact they're using BS justifications (that somehow BD is taking away fair use rights and HD-DVD isn't) is just amazing.

I don't buy DVDs from Universal because I don't like my own money used against me. Why should I treat SlySoft any differently?

Toshiba does not have the consumer in mind, they are spending money to degrade consumer experience of those not using their format instead of spending it to make the experience better for their own customers. This is bad for customers and I'm not interested in supporting it.

[peestandingup @ Nov 7th 2007 10:37PM]

"I don't buy DVDs from Universal because I don't like my own money used against me."

But yet you'll support a company like Sony who time & time again have basically tried every way it knows how to weasel its own proprietary formats into your lifestyle so they can have total control of the bottom line??

Yeah, nice priorities.

[why not the LS2LS7? @ Nov 7th 2007 10:53PM]

BluRay has several major backers. It's HD-DVD that is the "go it alone" standard. I can't see the logic in supporting Toshiba in their insistence to push their own standard which is no less proprietary than BluRay.

As to Sony's standards. I like CD. I like DVD. I like 3/4 UMatic. I like 3.5" floppy disc. People who call out Sony in this way as the pusher of failed proprietary formats are myopic, and frequently omit formats that succeeded because it undercuts their point. And people who bring up stuff like Memory Stick probably haven't worked with the SD consortium as I have. They're complete asses. SD is no less proprietary than Memory Stick, it's just more widely adopted.

I've had a Sony digicam with CF support for almost 3 years. The latest Sony-Ericsson phones support Micro SD. The PS3 not only supports 3 formats of memory card (SD, CF and Memory Stick), but recently dropped the memory stick reader completely (40GB)! They save to USB memory keys, from any company.

Any company with a history will have done some bad things. Sony doesn't seem so bad to me right now though.

[Reader @ Nov 7th 2007 11:05PM]

Have we already forgotten the Sony rootkit incidents?

[Evan @ Nov 7th 2007 11:15PM]

Man LS2 you certainly have a unique way of looking at things.

That's all I got to say.

[Tonicboy @ Nov 8th 2007 12:34AM]

Dude, did you ever hear of "sticks and stones can break my bones, but words can never hurt me"? So what if SlySoft has some unkind words for your format of choice, does it really matter? Are your feelings really hurt that much that you feel you need to get your panties in a bunch?

[why not the LS2LS7? @ Nov 8th 2007 2:50AM]

Sorry, when I said Universal above, I meant Paramount. I don't like what Universal did, but there is no information they accepted money to try to kill BluRay, unlike Paramount.

[Jesse @ Nov 7th 2007 10:06PM]

I've been saying that for a while now about Blu-ray, how can film fans choose BD? HD DVD is worth it just for the fact that it is Region Free. My friends and I had to buy special players to ignore regions on DVD, the lack thereof on HD DVD is like a breath of fresh air. I can make HD DVDs that play in my player and burn them to regular DVD disc with the equipment I already have, how kickass is that? As an independent filmmaker I already have two films that I have distributed on HD DVD at no additional cost.

[why not the LS2LS7? @ Nov 7th 2007 10:11PM]

Region free is nice, no argument. All BluRay discs library titles (any title over 6 months old) is also region free. It's not as good as region-free from day 1, but it's something. Some companies that release movies on BluRay release them all-region on day 1, and those that don't do so do it because their internal policies at their companies prohibit it, which is just one of the reasons they don't support HD-DVD. What I'm saying there is that if BD (and its region protection) didn't exist, it's quite possible companies wouldn't support HD disc at all (unless HD-DVD changed to allow them to be region locked).

I don't know about the burning thing, I don't quite get what you are saying.

[Jeff @ Nov 7th 2007 10:19PM]

"I've been saying that for a while now about Blu-ray, how can film fans choose BD?"

Oh I dunno, it's a better format? *And* its backers don't pay money to studios to keep their movies off of rivals' formats? Yeah, that's really consumer-friendly.

I don't understand why people support monopolistic enterprises. Exclusivity deals don't help anybody.

"HD DVD is worth it just for the fact that it is Region Free."

Tell me, what Blu-Ray discs are there that have been released in another region that you now own on HD-DVD from that same region? (Not from the United States.)

My bet is you have exactly zero such discs. That makes your argument worthless.

I'm as against region codes as anybody, but the only other "region" I even care about - ie. the only other DVD region with any releases worth anything - is Japan. And they're in region 1 for Blu-ray, just like the US.

"I can make HD DVDs that play in my player and burn them to regular DVD disc with the equipment I already have, how kickass is that?"

Huh? Either you're confused or you just misspoke. You can't make HD-DVD's "with the equipment you already have" unless you already have an HD-DVD burner. In which case, why is burning them to DVD a selling point? You can do the same with Blu-ray, including BD+ discs after this AnyDVD update.

Regardless, HD-DVD discs are copy protected just like BD discs are, the only difference is BD+. It's stupid for the AnyDVD folks to use the "AACS is not mandatory" argument, that's like saying "region coding is not mandatory" on DVD's. Technically true, but totally moot when 99.99999% of all discs employ it.

HD-DVD is no more consumer-friendly than BD. The only thing that matters is storage space, codecs and DTR. BD wins.

[Charles @ Nov 7th 2007 11:15PM]

Blu-ray has a 66.6% higher capacity and 47.6% higher data transfer rate than HD-DVD, both of which allow for higher quality audio and video. Given this I really don’t see why people are being ranked low for pointing out that Blu-ray is the superior format. To say otherwise would be like saying that a 300GB hard disk with a 150MB/sec transfer speed is better than a 500GB hard disk with a 250MB/sec transfer speed.

It seems that Microsoft’s backing of HD-DVD has turned this into a Microsoft vs Sony thing for many Engadget readers and objectivity has been lost. Since HD-DVD’s main backer (Toshiba) and Blu-ray’s main backer (Sony) are both Japanese companies there are no factors to cloud the judgement of the Japanese and, if this graph of player sales is to be believed, they have clearly recognised which is the superior format:

http://img139.imageshack.us/my.php?image=recordershare0710290711kc7.jpg

[Jesse @ Nov 8th 2007 3:51AM]

@Jeff

It's you friend, who are mistaken. I am capable of burning HD DVD formated movies onto DVD-R and DVD+R disc. I have done several times, it works and the results are in full HD, the playtime is shorter but all I need is an HD movie and DVD Studio Pro. Look it up before you call me out next time.

[zargon @ Nov 8th 2007 8:13AM]

"Oh I dunno, it's a better format? *And* its backers don't pay money to studios to keep their movies off of rivals' formats? Yeah, that's really consumer-friendly.

I don't understand why people support monopolistic enterprises. Exclusivity deals don't help anybody."

Ha ha ha ha, that is a good one. HD-DVD never paid money to Paramount or Dreamworks, the money was used to help promote the movies... big difference.

However, if you want to talk about people paying off people. You are niave if you are trying to claim the the BDA has never paid off anyone when there is a paper trail for some of them, like Target. On top of that, all the BDA exclusive studios when asked at IFA if they were paid off. None of the studios would answer the question directly with Disney coming out and saying "no comment", seems real fishy to me. Especially when Disney paid money to and was involved with the interactive features with HD-DVD and then all of the sudden went Blu-ray exclusive.

Some poeple really need to get their heads out of their ass and open their eyes. The amount of FUD, whether it is due to ignorance or lying is pretty bad. Neither format or companies are perfect, nor is one going to win any time soon. People just have to get over that fact and go format neutral.

People also need to get over the BD is the superior format, sure, maybe on paper. But in reality the space and bitrate (total joke and only used by spec whores) mean nothing. HD-DVD PQ and AQ have been able to match that of BD, so the point is moot. I can't wait for TL51 to be released with full support for all HD-DVD players, it will just be one less thing either side will have to argue about.

That being said, I think the end of Q4 is going to be interesting. With HD-DVDs current head of steam, BD is going to have to pull out some major stops to even try to keep their current lead or possibly even a marginal lead.

[HyperHacker @ Nov 9th 2007 8:22PM]

"To say otherwise would be like saying that a 300GB hard disk with a 150MB/sec transfer speed is better than a 500GB hard disk with a 250MB/sec transfer speed."
Thing is the 500GB disk can't be used outside of North America or Japan, requires you to encrypt and decrypt all your files with their proprietary encryption program, and is manufactured by an untrustworthy company who has previously placed computer viruses (under the guise of "copy protection") on their products.

It also gets quite interesting when you look at multilayer HD-DVDs being capable of well more than 50GB, if this ever gets implemented.

[Ang @ Nov 7th 2007 10:13PM]

Wow, Slysoft big statement about HD DVD, good for you..... and you piss off Fox in the same post.

Good luck with HD DVD then, for me when all new HD DVD titles come out with uncompressed PCM audio, I'll support them, till then I'll stick with bluray. (And yes uncompressed does sound heaps better, if you can't hear the difference, get a better audio system or your ears tested)

[John Doe @ Nov 7th 2007 10:34PM]

you need to learn what LOSSLESS means...

[why not the LS2LS7? @ Nov 7th 2007 10:43PM]

You're right, he got his terminology wrong. Even though some people still say compressed (non-lossily) soundtracks sound worse than uncompressed ones. I cannot see how this can be true.

Even with compressed (lossless) audio tracks, HD-DVD has a problem. The high amount of data in a lossless 7.1 audio soundtrack requires that extras be kicked to the curb or the video be degraded compared to a BluRay. This already was an issue on some releases and is presenting a problem with the LOTR movies.

[Ang @ Nov 7th 2007 11:31PM]

@John Doe, Please stop with the patronizing, I know the difference between lossless formats and uncompressed PCM, Do you?

Like I said before, I'm not talking about good enough, or close to, or similar, or sometimes you can't tell the difference.

In my opinion, I see Uncompressed PCM as the reference, the high-end audio standard for this current generation of HD Movie formats, catering for the individual that doesn't want compromise, why is that so hard to understand.

Major lossless formats like Dolby TrueHD (Meridian Lossless Packing) and DTS-HD Master Audio, are great.

If you haven't noticed the difference, that's cool, enjoy your movies, I have.

[John Doe @ Nov 8th 2007 12:32AM]

Lossless data compression is a class of data compression algorithms that allows the exact original data to be reconstructed from the compressed data. This can be contrasted to lossy data compression, which does not allow the exact original data to be reconstructed from the compressed data.

The formats you mentioned are both LOSSLESS...

THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE... not a little... NO DIFFERENCE... that's what lossless means...

The ONLY advantage to an uncompressed source over a lossless one is it requires less processing power to produce it...

Just because you want to hear a difference... doesn't mean there actually is one... If you are really an audiophile... the best thing you can do is get a high end player with better audio hardware...

[Beau @ Nov 9th 2007 11:59AM]

There have been many sound mixer people who have stated that on there sound stage with reference speaker systems that there is no sound difference to the human ear between lossless and uncompressed. if you claim to be able to hear the difference that great for you, but 99 percent wont and at lest 75% dont have the equipment to even play back a pcm surround sound track. If you ask the average consumer they don't care so long as it sounds good, and good to them is stereo on there tv's speakers. If you go to HiDef digest and look at the review for transformers, you will see it only has a DD+ sound track that is lossy, and they gave it a 5 star rating.

[Ang @ Nov 8th 2007 6:21AM]

"Lossless data compression is a class of data compression algorithms that allows the exact original data to be reconstructed from the compressed data" - Algorithms and Reconstructed are the key words here, also error correction, and yes they are processor dependant, that is exactly my point, allot can be lost (how the waveform is shaped) in post processing, and thats exactly what I hear. Actually I first heard these differences when meridian was putting forth it's MLP technology, It sounded very damn close but not exactly the same compared to the original PCM source.

Uncompressed PCM doesn't seem to suffer as much, that is possibly why it sounds better/different to me.

"If you are really an audiophile" Sir it is rude to assume. How do you know what I do for a living? Everybody knows the source is the most important, no system can improve what isn't there in the first place. That goes for Video and Audio. The more bandwidth the better I say.

[Serengeti @ Nov 8th 2007 6:45AM]

Ang, consider another form of compression for a second... ZIP files. If ZIP files were lossy, data would never make it out of the package and contain everything they did before they were ZIPped. You can't tell the difference between the file before and after ZIPping, because there is none.

Audio is data as well, and like ZIP files, if it is compressed using lossless methods, there can be NO difference between the origin and the output from your stereo. You can't tell the difference, because much like data in a ZIP file, there CAN BE no difference.

[HyperHacker @ Nov 9th 2007 8:30PM]

To put it simply, if you can actually hear the difference between lossless and uncompressed, either your equipment or your brain is defective, because there is none. Now, with lossy compression, yes, some audiophiles can hear a difference IF the bitrate is low enough. I can easily tell a 192kbps MP3 from the original, but 320kbps rarely sounds any different. It's all a matter of the compression quality.

"Even with compressed (lossless) audio tracks, HD-DVD has a problem. The high amount of data in a lossless 7.1 audio soundtrack requires that extras be kicked to the curb or the video be degraded compared to a BluRay. This already was an issue on some releases and is presenting a problem with the LOTR movies."
So the extras have to be put on the other side of a 2-sided disc. Big deal? If they're actually throwing them out entirely instead of doing this, then blame the studios for making this decision, not the discs.

[Jesse @ Nov 7th 2007 10:18PM]

I'm saying, I can shoot a movie in HD then burn it into an HD DVD formated disc but on normal DVD media with a normal DVD burner, it plays in full HD and I was able to make the discs without purchasing an HD DVD burner. Final Cut Studio supports it in DVD Studio Pro right off the bat.

[why not the LS2LS7? @ Nov 7th 2007 10:30PM]

That's cool. I'm not sure I'm blown away, since it doesn't save on the playback side. Given the other costs of HD content production, buying a BD burner at current prices isn't bad, in a few months it won't be anything of note.

Thanks for the info though. It's always cool to learn something new.

[John @ Nov 7th 2007 10:33PM]

I want to try it out, but then I'd have to have both a BD+ disk and a blu-ray player...

[John Doe @ Nov 7th 2007 10:34PM]

"I can make HD DVDs that play in my player and burn them to regular DVD disc with the equipment I already have, how kickass is that?"

Huh? Either you're confused or you just misspoke. You can't make HD-DVD's "with the equipment you already have" unless you already have an HD-DVD burner. In which case, why is burning them to DVD a selling point? You can do the same with Blu-ray, including BD+ discs after this AnyDVD update.

Regardless, HD-DVD discs are copy protected just like BD discs are, the only difference is BD+. It's stupid for the AnyDVD folks to use the "AACS is not mandatory" argument, that's like saying "region coding is not mandatory" on DVD's. Technically true, but totally moot when 99.99999% of all discs employ it.

HD-DVD is no more consumer-friendly than BD. The only thing that matters is storage space, codecs and DTR. BD wins.

Do more research:

HD REC

HD Rec is an extension of the HD DVD format for storing HD content on regular red laser DVDs using H.264/MPEG-4 AVC compression.[91] It was approved by the DVD Forum on September 12, 2007

3x DVD

The HD DVD format also applies to current red laser DVDs, which offers a low-cost option for distributors; this type of disc is called "3x DVD", as it is capable of three times the bandwidth of regular DVD-Video.

3x DVDs are physically identical to normal DVDs, thus why the cost is lower for the physical medium. Although 3x DVDs provide the same high definition content, their playback time is less. For instance, on an 8.5 GB DVD you could fit about 85 minutes of 1080p video encoded with VC-1 or AVC at an average bitrate of 13 Mbit/s, suitable for short subjects (training films, home movies), but unsuitable for feature film-length content.

It is technically possible for consumers to create HD DVD compatible discs using low cost DVD-R or DVD+R media.

As for consumer friendly...

You forgot a few things...

One, COST... Show me a $99 Blu-Ray player?

Two, functionality, like it or not, blu-ray is still incomplete as a format... HD-DVD isn't...

Three, quality and quality vs cost, go check out some of the face to face comparison reviews, HD-DVD is often equal or even better than its Blu-Ray counterparts... and for less money...

[why not the LS2LS7? @ Nov 7th 2007 10:41PM]

Show me a $99 HD-DVD player.

It was a promotional thing. They're $199 and up again now, which is still a decent price.

Blu-Ray is complete as a format now, unless you want online functionality. And I don't. HD-DVD has used it so far to sell T-shirts and such. I honestly don't even give a crap about BD 1.1. I don't need PIP director commentary of any size. Others may disagree, but seriously. I mostly rent movies from Netflix and return them after I watch them. I'm not going to watch the movie twice in a row to see commentary and I'm not going to re-rent it later to watch it.

You're living in the past on the quality thing. Movies are now identical on both formats, they use the same encoding. It is normal for early discs to stink. Early HD-DVDs were no treat, and I have the first DVD made (Twister), and it's crap. None of these things reflect on the formats themselves or current offertings. And the average sale price of an HD-DVD is HIGHER than that of a BluRay, not lower.

[shawnmos @ Nov 7th 2007 11:42PM]

You are incorrect. You can burn high definition content in HD DVD format on a standard DVDR and play it back in an HD DVD player.

You can only hold about an hour or so, but it's fine for home videos.

[Asterra @ Nov 8th 2007 3:50AM]

Credibility, meet the window. Goodbye. That's what happens when somebody says "I don't care about PIP". That is reaching. Specifically singling out a feature which their format of choice not only failed to provide while the competition did, but whose implementation is stigmatized by the fact that there will always be people who can't use it, which will cause studios to think twice about adding such features. Rather petty, and more to the point it undermines any legitimacy your arguments may once have carried.

[why not the LS2LS7? @ Nov 8th 2007 11:52AM]

I don't care about PIP commentary. I'm sure some people might turn this around and thing I'm saying this for their benefit. They're just egotists.

I don't care about PIP commentary. I haven't listened to commentary on DVDs or any other disc for the last 4 years.

Content providers have to think about PIP issues on HD-DVd too, since despite it always having been in the spec, not all players meet the spec. I'm not crying over this either.

[aaronlh @ Nov 7th 2007 10:37PM]

Lots of Blu-Ray martyrs in this thread :)

[sean.boots @ Nov 7th 2007 10:50PM]

Interesting discussion, eh? I wonder how many people here were paid to promote their respective format.
If anyone admitted it, I can't decide if I would admire them more, or less. Hmm...

[Dan @ Nov 7th 2007 10:49PM]

Here's where I'm patting myself on the back for being a late adopter in the realm of digital audio and video. Heck, by the time I start buying HD programming, it'll be on SD cards, laser-scanned polymer cubes, etc. Fight one Consumers, fight on, manufacturers. May sanity show up and take over.