"The Hotz incident was followed in February by a German police raid on the apartment of Alexander Egorenkov, another hacker who had distributed software that let PlayStation consoles run homemade games. Other technology companies have found ways to channel hackers' energy without resorting to lawsuits. Microsoft (MSFT), for instance, permits hackers to unlock its Kinect gaming device and invites some of them to its conferences. Google (GOOG) pays white-hat hackers who help identify bugs. Sony is far more uncompromising, says Robert Vamosi, a senior analyst at security firm Mocana. "Hardware manufacturers like Sony just aren't very good about listening when a security researcher presents them with a flaw," Vamosi says. "
That paragraph I just quoted up there is some of the sloppiest journalism I've ever seen. The analogy being drawn is completely without merit. Microsoft is "hacker" friendly because they allow people to fool around with the Kinect? And Sony is hacker unfriendly because they removed a feature (the Linux install option) that they feared would lead to massive piracy? And Google is just great because they offer bounties for security flaws? In what way are any of those facts similar? None of them are even referring to the same sort of "hacking." If Google made a game system that made its money based on licensing fees from software sales, it would do everything within its power to prevent piracy. Microsoft already does this. Running homebrew was not what Sony was trying to stop.
What I'm about to say will probably be very unpopular here. Anyway, the "hacker" (I hate their usage here... they should say cracker) excuse that they are just trying to enable homebrew software is utterly laughable as well. As soon as Geohotz was successful, numerous other companies capitalized on it and went to that next (tiny, tiny, tiny) step to enable running pirated games. Should Sony have sued Geohotz? Probably not. But what did Geohotz honestly think people were going to do with his developments? Does he want people to keep making games for the PS3? Did he honestly think that people wouldn't immediately turn around and use his progress to pirate games? The ethics of this supposed "hacker" community leave a lot to be desired, and I truly wish we could return to the old usage of the term, and stop applying it to people that are really just safe crackers and thieves.
Our laws are completely inadequate for addressing this kind of abuse now, and I dread to see what sort of draconian measures will be put in place in response to this sort of shortsighted, unethical, and lame "hacking." If you don't want a closed system, then don't buy it. This is what will give us more open systems in the future, not enabling pirates.
The reason what you're saying is unpopular here is because it is fundamentally incorrect.
What difference do you see between hacking your PS3 and hacking your kinect? How is hacking your ps3 "cracking"? In my opinion, and I suspect that the vast majority of technologically literate people would agree with me, what happened with the PS3 fits the classic definition of hacking perfectly.
The Kinect hacks consisted of using the Kinect device for reasons other than originally intended. No laws were broken. The intent is basically pure. The hackers (because they are real hackers) just asked themselves "what else can we do with this hardware?" They broke no laws. They did no economic harm to MS, and if anything, helped them.
On the other hand, the PS3 hack will primarily be used to enable piracy. That's it really. Did it initially enable homebrew games? Yes, but is that what the vast majority of people will use it for? You're deluded if you think otherwise.
The problem I have with non-ethical non-consequentialist crackers like Geohotz is that they are not solving a legitimate problem in the first place. If you want to make open systems, then stop providing monetary support to closed systems in the first place.
Console hacking in the past has contributed to new industry growth. When the original Xbox was hacked, one of the outcomes was Xbox Media Center (XBMC).
XBMC led to incentives to accelerate the development of home media center components like audio/video decoders. This obviously helps everyone in the growing media center industry.
XBMC also is directly responsible for the birth of at least two startups in the media center space, Boxee and Plex.
So while some companies in an established and profitable industry lost some revenue from piracy, a new industry got a big boost from people being able to experiment with and innovate on top of a console.
And what positive outcomes have come of Geohotz' work? Geohotz worked exclusively to enable piracy! Sorry, but it's true! Sony removed the Other OS install option because of Gehotz' work towards enabling piracy! Read his wikipedia entry (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Hotz) if you don't believe me.
The PS3 was a freer console for the masses before his work. His work enabled piracy, theft, and constitutes extortion. What part of his initial explanation of the PS3 root key divulgence don't you understand? Here it is:
"
~geohot
props to fail0verflow for the asymmetric half
no donate link, just use this info wisely
i do not condone piracy
if you want your next console to be secure, get in touch with me. any of you 3.
it'd be fun to be on the other side.
...and this is a real self, hello world
although it's not NPDRM, so please wait to run...
shouts to the guys who did PSL1GHT
without you, I couldn't release this
first piece of homebrew you can run
put in service mode, put on usb stick, boot"
"i do not condone piracy" = I don't think you should use this for piracy
"if you want your next console to be secure, get in touch with me. any of you 3." = I know this shit I did will be used for piracy, that's why you 3 (Nintendo, MS, Sony) may want to consult me to avoid the massive piracy that will surely result due to my hacks in the future
Is this not, in a sense, extortion? Is he not willfully and knowingly enabling theft?
My point is that the PS3 was a more open platform before Geohotz arrived on the scene. It would be more open today if it weren't for his efforts, which are almost entirely in aid of piracy and theft. Please, name one thing that he has enabled that wasn't previously possible with an Other OS install that is not essentially just stealing. Please. Go for it. Tell me I'm wrong.
I'm just a guy that makes a living making software, Geohotz is a guy that is making a living by robbing the companies that pay me. Why should we grant him the glorified title of hacker? RMS is a hacker. Linus is a hacker. PG is a hacker. Carmack is a hacker.
The one major thing I know of that has come of this is that I can put linux on my ps3 again. I'm happy about that. I'd like to think he willfully and knowingly unlocked a piece of hardware for the masses knowing it would primarily be used for piracy plus lots of other cool things too.
GeoHot hacked the PS3 to re-enable the linux option. Sony used the linux option to market the PS3 to hackers. They then turned it off. GeoHot turned it back on. Sony sued him.
They turned it off because of geohotz' hacking activities which would enable massive piracy (not his goal, but a consequence he understood very well). Read his Wikipedia entry.
The PS3 got hacked. So Sony turned off an otherwise useful and legitimate feature that some people paid for. Then that got hacked. So Sony can turn the OtherOS feature back on now: it is no longer required to hack the PS3, which was their argument for removing it. Sony are clearly unable to stop hackers. But they are quite good at fucking their customers.
This "enable massive piracy" claim sounds really scary. You do know, that right now, there are millions of vehicles out there that can all be used to commit crime, murder people, crash into banks and run off with ATMs, etc. And yet, these criminal enabling machines just lying around (OMG theres two outside my house right now), there is no outbreak of "massive vehicular crimes".
Yes, Steevdave, I'm with you on that! I agree that it is unfortunate that Sony removed the install Linux option. But why did they remove that? Why did they add it in the first place?
They added it because they knew that the PS3 could be used in cluster computing and that it could be an interesting feature for Linux enthusiasts that wanted to use the PS3 beyond its original capabilities (e.g. as a better, crazier home theater device, or as a desktop replacement even). Then people started to get closer to being able to run pirated games with certain versions of the "Other OS."
At that point Sony realized that it would be better to drop that feature from their hardware rather than risk massive piracy. But what did the removal of that option really entail? Did it mean that all those massive compute clusters could no longer run? Nope. Did it mean that people that were using the console with games that they bought up until that point couldn't play those games any more? Nope.
It just meant that if they wanted to play new games, or play online, that they couldn't have that option any more. No killswitch. Nothing too awful. Protecting their business interests. And who really forced them to do that? It was the crackers that were trying to enable piracy, err... sorry... "homebrew." Sony is not against hackers. They want hackers. They don't want crackers and thieves.
its use beyond the original hacker is not the issue here..if it was we would never have encrypted email because at a certain point in time US gov outlawed all private encrypted software..when pgp was first programmed before it was released it was illegal to have any software that encrypted..and than the US gov agencies finally relented and allowed commercial software that encrypted..
Another example, If I hack the US ID card to see what data is stored on it..am I now a criminal by what the popular use of that hack is?
This is not actually a question of the law, but of ethics. Geohotz did not break any Federal law in doing what he did. If you know that providing something (the root key to the PS3) will enable massive piracy, should you do it? Here is his original post regarding the supply of the root key:
"
~geohot
props to fail0verflow for the asymmetric half
no donate link, just use this info wisely
i do not condone piracy
if you want your next console to be secure, get in touch with me. any of you 3.
it'd be fun to be on the other side.
...and this is a real self, hello world
although it's not NPDRM, so please wait to run...
shouts to the guys who did PSL1GHT
without you, I couldn't release this
first piece of homebrew you can run
put in service mode, put on usb stick, boot"
So, in that initial post, he does not solicit donations (although he had before and does after). He then announces that he doesn't "condone piracy", then he solicits employment from the three major console manufacturers. What reason would they have to employ him? What he's doing just enables homebrew software, right? They don't really care about homebrew now do they? No, they care about piracy. So what he's really conveying here is this: "I just enabled massive piracy on the console that so far has been hardest to crack. I don't approve of it, but I know that's what it will actually be used for. Hey, why don't you give me some money so this won't happen again?" Sounds like extortion and accessory to theft to me. But our laws don't really work out that way. Yet. I don't want our laws to enable that. I want people with Geohotz' skill to be responsible and actually work with companies like Sony. Is it partially Sony's fault that he didn't? Maybe, but that's a tenuous conclusion at best (does anyone know if he ever privately gave this information to Sony? or if he even attempted to?). On the other hand, it's patently obvious that he knew exactly what his work would be used for, and released it to the masses anyway.
You're not addressing the issue of ethics in any way. What he did enabled theft. Theft is unethical. He enabled theft, so he is unethical. Want open hardware? Don't buy closed hardware. Don't want companies to close their hardware? Don't enable theft.
What's hard about this? Do you not understand that companies will lobby very hard and very successfully to enable laws that are so strict that it will not only make what geohotz did illegal, but what the (admirable) kinect hackers did illegal as well?
The Laws that can and will be made as the result of his craven greediness, stupidity, and arrogance will not be favorable to any real hacker, because laws are not a precise enough instrument for enforcing ethical standards. We must enforce the ethical standards. Geohotz should be a pariah, not a hero, for anyone other than the piracy enablers that will make a fortune from his work.
Comments
"The Hotz incident was followed in February by a German police raid on the apartment of Alexander Egorenkov, another hacker who had distributed software that let PlayStation consoles run homemade games. Other technology companies have found ways to channel hackers' energy without resorting to lawsuits. Microsoft (MSFT), for instance, permits hackers to unlock its Kinect gaming device and invites some of them to its conferences. Google (GOOG) pays white-hat hackers who help identify bugs. Sony is far more uncompromising, says Robert Vamosi, a senior analyst at security firm Mocana. "Hardware manufacturers like Sony just aren't very good about listening when a security researcher presents them with a flaw," Vamosi says. "
That paragraph I just quoted up there is some of the sloppiest journalism I've ever seen. The analogy being drawn is completely without merit. Microsoft is "hacker" friendly because they allow people to fool around with the Kinect? And Sony is hacker unfriendly because they removed a feature (the Linux install option) that they feared would lead to massive piracy? And Google is just great because they offer bounties for security flaws? In what way are any of those facts similar? None of them are even referring to the same sort of "hacking." If Google made a game system that made its money based on licensing fees from software sales, it would do everything within its power to prevent piracy. Microsoft already does this. Running homebrew was not what Sony was trying to stop.
What I'm about to say will probably be very unpopular here. Anyway, the "hacker" (I hate their usage here... they should say cracker) excuse that they are just trying to enable homebrew software is utterly laughable as well. As soon as Geohotz was successful, numerous other companies capitalized on it and went to that next (tiny, tiny, tiny) step to enable running pirated games. Should Sony have sued Geohotz? Probably not. But what did Geohotz honestly think people were going to do with his developments? Does he want people to keep making games for the PS3? Did he honestly think that people wouldn't immediately turn around and use his progress to pirate games? The ethics of this supposed "hacker" community leave a lot to be desired, and I truly wish we could return to the old usage of the term, and stop applying it to people that are really just safe crackers and thieves.
Our laws are completely inadequate for addressing this kind of abuse now, and I dread to see what sort of draconian measures will be put in place in response to this sort of shortsighted, unethical, and lame "hacking." If you don't want a closed system, then don't buy it. This is what will give us more open systems in the future, not enabling pirates.
The reason what you're saying is unpopular here is because it is fundamentally incorrect.
What difference do you see between hacking your PS3 and hacking your kinect? How is hacking your ps3 "cracking"? In my opinion, and I suspect that the vast majority of technologically literate people would agree with me, what happened with the PS3 fits the classic definition of hacking perfectly.
The Kinect hacks consisted of using the Kinect device for reasons other than originally intended. No laws were broken. The intent is basically pure. The hackers (because they are real hackers) just asked themselves "what else can we do with this hardware?" They broke no laws. They did no economic harm to MS, and if anything, helped them.
On the other hand, the PS3 hack will primarily be used to enable piracy. That's it really. Did it initially enable homebrew games? Yes, but is that what the vast majority of people will use it for? You're deluded if you think otherwise.
The problem I have with non-ethical non-consequentialist crackers like Geohotz is that they are not solving a legitimate problem in the first place. If you want to make open systems, then stop providing monetary support to closed systems in the first place.
Console hacking in the past has contributed to new industry growth. When the original Xbox was hacked, one of the outcomes was Xbox Media Center (XBMC).
XBMC led to incentives to accelerate the development of home media center components like audio/video decoders. This obviously helps everyone in the growing media center industry.
XBMC also is directly responsible for the birth of at least two startups in the media center space, Boxee and Plex.
So while some companies in an established and profitable industry lost some revenue from piracy, a new industry got a big boost from people being able to experiment with and innovate on top of a console.
And what positive outcomes have come of Geohotz' work? Geohotz worked exclusively to enable piracy! Sorry, but it's true! Sony removed the Other OS install option because of Gehotz' work towards enabling piracy! Read his wikipedia entry (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Hotz) if you don't believe me.
The PS3 was a freer console for the masses before his work. His work enabled piracy, theft, and constitutes extortion. What part of his initial explanation of the PS3 root key divulgence don't you understand? Here it is:
" ~geohot
props to fail0verflow for the asymmetric half no donate link, just use this info wisely i do not condone piracy
if you want your next console to be secure, get in touch with me. any of you 3. it'd be fun to be on the other side.
...and this is a real self, hello world although it's not NPDRM, so please wait to run... shouts to the guys who did PSL1GHT without you, I couldn't release this
first piece of homebrew you can run put in service mode, put on usb stick, boot"
"i do not condone piracy" = I don't think you should use this for piracy
"if you want your next console to be secure, get in touch with me. any of you 3." = I know this shit I did will be used for piracy, that's why you 3 (Nintendo, MS, Sony) may want to consult me to avoid the massive piracy that will surely result due to my hacks in the future
Is this not, in a sense, extortion? Is he not willfully and knowingly enabling theft?
My point is that the PS3 was a more open platform before Geohotz arrived on the scene. It would be more open today if it weren't for his efforts, which are almost entirely in aid of piracy and theft. Please, name one thing that he has enabled that wasn't previously possible with an Other OS install that is not essentially just stealing. Please. Go for it. Tell me I'm wrong.
I'm just a guy that makes a living making software, Geohotz is a guy that is making a living by robbing the companies that pay me. Why should we grant him the glorified title of hacker? RMS is a hacker. Linus is a hacker. PG is a hacker. Carmack is a hacker.
Geohotz is a cracker.
The one major thing I know of that has come of this is that I can put linux on my ps3 again. I'm happy about that. I'd like to think he willfully and knowingly unlocked a piece of hardware for the masses knowing it would primarily be used for piracy plus lots of other cool things too.
PS3 jailbreaking enabled the Showtime media center developer to port the media player to the PS3: http://www.lonelycoder.com/hts/showtime_overview.html
It's much better than jumping through DLNA hoops.
GeoHot hacked the PS3 to re-enable the linux option. Sony used the linux option to market the PS3 to hackers. They then turned it off. GeoHot turned it back on. Sony sued him.
They turned it off because of geohotz' hacking activities which would enable massive piracy (not his goal, but a consequence he understood very well). Read his Wikipedia entry.
The PS3 got hacked. So Sony turned off an otherwise useful and legitimate feature that some people paid for. Then that got hacked. So Sony can turn the OtherOS feature back on now: it is no longer required to hack the PS3, which was their argument for removing it. Sony are clearly unable to stop hackers. But they are quite good at fucking their customers.
This "enable massive piracy" claim sounds really scary. You do know, that right now, there are millions of vehicles out there that can all be used to commit crime, murder people, crash into banks and run off with ATMs, etc. And yet, these criminal enabling machines just lying around (OMG theres two outside my house right now), there is no outbreak of "massive vehicular crimes".
Umm, the system was open when we first bought it...
Yes, Steevdave, I'm with you on that! I agree that it is unfortunate that Sony removed the install Linux option. But why did they remove that? Why did they add it in the first place?
They added it because they knew that the PS3 could be used in cluster computing and that it could be an interesting feature for Linux enthusiasts that wanted to use the PS3 beyond its original capabilities (e.g. as a better, crazier home theater device, or as a desktop replacement even). Then people started to get closer to being able to run pirated games with certain versions of the "Other OS."
At that point Sony realized that it would be better to drop that feature from their hardware rather than risk massive piracy. But what did the removal of that option really entail? Did it mean that all those massive compute clusters could no longer run? Nope. Did it mean that people that were using the console with games that they bought up until that point couldn't play those games any more? Nope.
It just meant that if they wanted to play new games, or play online, that they couldn't have that option any more. No killswitch. Nothing too awful. Protecting their business interests. And who really forced them to do that? It was the crackers that were trying to enable piracy, err... sorry... "homebrew." Sony is not against hackers. They want hackers. They don't want crackers and thieves.
its use beyond the original hacker is not the issue here..if it was we would never have encrypted email because at a certain point in time US gov outlawed all private encrypted software..when pgp was first programmed before it was released it was illegal to have any software that encrypted..and than the US gov agencies finally relented and allowed commercial software that encrypted..
Another example, If I hack the US ID card to see what data is stored on it..am I now a criminal by what the popular use of that hack is?
This is not actually a question of the law, but of ethics. Geohotz did not break any Federal law in doing what he did. If you know that providing something (the root key to the PS3) will enable massive piracy, should you do it? Here is his original post regarding the supply of the root key:
" ~geohot
props to fail0verflow for the asymmetric half no donate link, just use this info wisely i do not condone piracy
if you want your next console to be secure, get in touch with me. any of you 3. it'd be fun to be on the other side.
...and this is a real self, hello world although it's not NPDRM, so please wait to run... shouts to the guys who did PSL1GHT without you, I couldn't release this
first piece of homebrew you can run put in service mode, put on usb stick, boot"
So, in that initial post, he does not solicit donations (although he had before and does after). He then announces that he doesn't "condone piracy", then he solicits employment from the three major console manufacturers. What reason would they have to employ him? What he's doing just enables homebrew software, right? They don't really care about homebrew now do they? No, they care about piracy. So what he's really conveying here is this: "I just enabled massive piracy on the console that so far has been hardest to crack. I don't approve of it, but I know that's what it will actually be used for. Hey, why don't you give me some money so this won't happen again?" Sounds like extortion and accessory to theft to me. But our laws don't really work out that way. Yet. I don't want our laws to enable that. I want people with Geohotz' skill to be responsible and actually work with companies like Sony. Is it partially Sony's fault that he didn't? Maybe, but that's a tenuous conclusion at best (does anyone know if he ever privately gave this information to Sony? or if he even attempted to?). On the other hand, it's patently obvious that he knew exactly what his work would be used for, and released it to the masses anyway.
They'd be interested in hiring him because he's intelligent and has a very good, very low-level understanding of their anti-piracy tech.
You're not addressing the issue of ethics in any way. What he did enabled theft. Theft is unethical. He enabled theft, so he is unethical. Want open hardware? Don't buy closed hardware. Don't want companies to close their hardware? Don't enable theft.
What's hard about this? Do you not understand that companies will lobby very hard and very successfully to enable laws that are so strict that it will not only make what geohotz did illegal, but what the (admirable) kinect hackers did illegal as well?
The Laws that can and will be made as the result of his craven greediness, stupidity, and arrogance will not be favorable to any real hacker, because laws are not a precise enough instrument for enforcing ethical standards. We must enforce the ethical standards. Geohotz should be a pariah, not a hero, for anyone other than the piracy enablers that will make a fortune from his work.
Are you a programmer?
Yes