# Let's say I was going to hack my Direct TV Plus DVR to get the programs onto my ipod



## rileyray3000

How would I go about doing it? Is there someone who mods boxes to get the USB working? Is there some sort of program? ANything?

RR-


----------



## qwerty

Nothing short of burning to a DVD recorder and converting on your computer.


----------



## Earl Bonovich

Nope, no way to do it.

No one has come up with a hack to access the video contents of the R15


----------



## wbmccarty

Earl Bonovich said:


> No one has come up with a hack to access the video contents of the R15


That's an interesting and potentially significant observation. The world's supply of hackers is finite but ample (I mean the term in the positive sense). Why do so few of them seem to own an R15? More to the point, what is the hackers' choice for cable/sat and DVR now that DTV has moved away from Tivo? Surely not MythTV, which seems even buggier than the R15.


----------



## Earl Bonovich

Just as hackers/enthusiasts cracked x,y,z product.
New products are adapted to adjust to the exploits of those older products.

If there is one thing knows about... is how hackers/crackers can take advanatage of security holes, glitches (see the last 10 years of the battle over Access cards)

..........
With some of the VoD and other features that have been "announced" or talked about (aka NBC/FOX content early, "theatrical releases" 30/60 days after release, and other items that cost $$$ to view... the fact you can record a PPV before paying for it).... They have definently gone through great lengths to protect those segments of the hard drives


Just like everything out there... some day it will be cracked.
The question is... is it worth the cost (both in hard cash, and man-hours)

And once it is, you can bet the leson would be learned, and the next product would be that much more difficult to brake.


----------



## wbmccarty

Earl Bonovich said:


> And once it is, you can bet the leson would be learned, and the next product would be that much more difficult to brake.


This statement is logical. But, with due respect, I don't believe it to be true.

Implementation defects render even perfectly designed security mechanisms vulnerable. And, the software development team for the R15 has demonstrated unusual propensities for software defects. So, I think it's a safe bet that data within the R15 is quite vulnerable to access should anyone with sufficient skill and determination take on the project.


----------



## Steve Mehs

Qwerty's got it. Burn recorded programs to DVD and use Videora to convert.


----------



## wbmccarty

Steve Mehs said:


> Qwerty's got it. Burn recorded programs to DVD and use Videora to convert.


Shucks, that's no fun. What happened to detecting the Tempest radiation of the IDE bus, extracting and decoding the video data, and pushing it to the iPod via a quantum interface? 

Seriously, I use an external DVD writer. But, I miss the Tivo's Copy to VHS function that prefixes an information block describing a program to the program''s video stream. Ideally, I'd also like to be able to watch TV while I burn a DVD--or, at least, be able to pause a burn operation so that I can take an R&R (refrigerator and restroom) break.


----------



## Wolffpack

Earl Bonovich said:


> And once it is, you can bet the leson would be learned, and the next product would be that much more difficult to brake.


Hense some of the notion that hacks aren't released until the vendor comes out with a new product. For example, once the 2.5 Series Tivos were released the killhdinitrd exploit for series 2s became known to all. One could think an exploit for the Tivo Series 2.5s may already exist yet won't be know until the release of the Series 3.

All I can say is that if for once a vendor would supply customers with the functionality that the customer wants, hacking would be a thing of the past.

Plus, if DTV hadn't crippled their DTivo units as they did, the interest in hacking them wouldn't even exist. If DTivo units came with MRV and even maybe HMO, who would need to do a hack.

Then again, if the chosen few that determine what us customers really want in a DVR looked to what was available via hacks, they just might put out the greatest DVR ever. But those are all just "ifs".

Ok, that tired me out. I'm done for tonight. :new_Eyecr


----------



## mikewolf13

As a simpleton, I always thought it was easier to make functioning product, than a hack-proof product...

For all the bugs/glitches/flaws of the r15 , it's amazing that they failed in that area so completely, yet still it is up-to now invulenerable to hacking......


----------



## Earl Bonovich

mikewolf13 said:


> For all the bugs/glitches/flaws of the r15 , it's amazing that they failed in that area so completely, yet still it is up-to now invulenerable to hacking......


However, when you multi-billion dollar content providers that are already "freaked-out" by DVR technology..... and you are now asking them to allow content (such as the VoD, pre-air episodes of TV shows, and theatrical releases) to be put on the hard drive in a Digital form....... you can bet your sweet potatos that security and encryption of that area of the drive is tight.

Considering how relatively "easy" it is now to do on a the DTiVo platform.


----------



## mpitt

Earl Bonovich said:


> However, when you multi-billion dollar content providers that are already "freaked-out" by DVR technology..... and you are now asking them to allow content (such as the VoD, pre-air episodes of TV shows, and theatrical releases) to be put on the hard drive in a Digital form....... you can bet your sweet potatos that security and encryption of that area of the drive is tight.
> 
> I think I just lost my sweet potatoes. I tried to view a premium movie last night on my r15 which was recorded from this last weekend's freeview event. The show stopped playback after a half hour and said I did not have rights to view this program. Security and rights protection is a bit too tight.


----------



## mikewolf13

Earl Bonovich said:


> However, when you multi-billion dollar content providers that are already "freaked-out" by DVR technology..... and you are now asking them to allow content (such as the VoD, pre-air episodes of TV shows, and theatrical releases) to be put on the hard drive in a Digital form....... you can bet your sweet potatos that security and encryption of that area of the drive is tight.
> 
> Considering how relatively "easy" it is now to do on a the DTiVo platform.


Yes, They(content providers) seem quite freaked out...so much that I can now download those programs for free from many of their own websites. The genie is out of the bottle...DVD recorders, TIVO, home computer DVRs, etc.

Extraction is a promised future feature. So is external storage. so, DTV does not seem too wigged out...unless these are empty promises.

But assuming you are correct.. they (DTV) managed to effectively build a product which currently prevents any hacking or extraction. yet can't perform the functions established by previous DVR with nearly the same success rate.

It's like building a car that's impossible to steal...but that gets 5mpg and frequently stalls.

How can you be so effective in one area and so incompetent in the other?


----------



## wbmccarty

mikewolf13 said:


> How can you be so effective in one area and so incompetent in the other?


Precisely! They can't and they're not. Undoubtedly, the R15 is far from hack proof. This is actually _bad_ news for those of us who wish content providers would loosen up a bit. I can pretty well guarantee that the R15's vulnerabilities will be found and that the fallout will further increase industry paranoia and reluctance.


----------



## cabanaboy1977

mikewolf13 said:


> How can you be so effective in one area and so incompetent in the other?


I can't figure that out either. From my understand the R15 had more processing power and memory than the UTV or D* Tivo's. I never had my UTV lockup when making changes to SL's or deleting them (the Tivo does hang a little bit but it's not that bad) and there are no limits to SL's on Tivo's and UTV's. It seems like they may have given all the processing power to the Showcase function because it doesn't seem like they much of it to the DVR functions. I really hope they find out where all the wasted processing power is going. I Dream of the Day that I turn on my R15 and it zooms thru the menus and doesn't wait/lockup while managing SL's. I see good things in the future but would love to know what the road block that they can't seem to get around is.


----------



## mikewolf13

wbmccarty said:


> Precisely! They can't and they're not. Undoubtedly, the R15 is far from hack proof. This is actually _bad_ news for those of us who wish content providers would loosen up a bit. I can pretty well guarantee that the R15's vulnerabilities will be found and that the fallout will further increase industry paranoia and reluctance.


Just to re-state what is probably obvious. I do not think the R15 is hack-proof. I 'm sure it will be hacked, someone will claim $25K form weaknees etc.

It will happen.

But 6 months after release, the $25k remains unclaimed.

I only mean to suggest that the efforts to prevent hacking of the R15 were immensely superior to usability and reliability of the machine.


----------



## wbmccarty

mikewolf13 said:


> I only mean to suggest that the efforts to prevent hacking of the R15 were immensely superior to usability and reliability of the machine.


I see your point, I think. We've seen flaws in usability and reliability but we haven't seen flaws in security.

But, I can't reason backwards from the lack of evidence of security flaws to the true absence of such flaws. It's _much_ harder to write a secure application, let alone a secure appliance, than to write one that functions properly and reliably. From a software engineering standpoint, it's axiomatic that you can't write secure code unless you're able to write functional, reliable code. On a more macroscopic level, the sort of development process needed to avoid security flaws would also have been effective in avoiding functional flaws. So, I take it as a given that _major_ security flaws exist in the R15.

However, I could be wrong. It's happened once or twice in the past. 

P.S. Thinking further about the problem, I may come around to your point of view. If a box is sufficiently unreliable, exploits won't function as they should. That may be the R15's saving grace from a security standpoint. Its operation is so poorly defined that it's difficult to hack. No sarcasm intended. :eek2:


----------



## tdurden

I think people forget that the reason TiVo is so hackable is because it's based on Linux. There were many hackers out there that had a good knowledge of Linux, and it gave them a head start.

Who knows what the R15 uses? I don't know if it's a from-scratch OS (written in-house) or something like VxWorks. 

I think it will be a LONG time before we see any kind of hacks for the R15. Too much of an uphill climb.

Just my opinion. Your mileage may vary. Not valid in Canada.

Tyler


----------



## wbmccarty

tdurden said:


> I think it will be a LONG time before we see any kind of hacks for the R15. Too much of an uphill climb.


I agree with this claim and the rationale behind it. But, in my view, compromising the security of data stored on an R15 is another matter altogether. In the limiting case, an R15 hard drive could be removed and mounted under Linux or another OS. In general, it's not necessary to thoroughly understand an OS to find vulnerabilities related to systems running that OS. Inter-operation is a substantially more demanding goal.


----------



## cabanaboy1977

tdurden said:


> I think people forget that the reason TiVo is so hackable is because it's based on Linux. There were many hackers out there that had a good knowledge of Linux, and it gave them a head start.
> 
> Who knows what the R15 uses? I don't know if it's a from-scratch OS (written in-house) or something like VxWorks.
> 
> I think it will be a LONG time before we see any kind of hacks for the R15. Too much of an uphill climb.
> 
> Just my opinion. Your mileage may vary. Not valid in Canada.
> 
> Tyler


If you take a look at the UTV they have never made any hacks for it. The closest they come to a hack is being able to unlock the drive xfer the data to a new drive (I think they might have a way to play the video's now but still no way to xfer them to a normal format). And this has been around for years now. I think Tyler's right it's not that D* disabled the Tivo functions it's that the product was Linux based. Heck look at Xbox, those were hacked mostly because they where running a form of linux. If they had had there own file system like the R15 or the UTV I don't think it would have been hacked that easy. It still would have been hacked but it would have taken longer (every one wants to hack games no matter what the platform). In my opinion any thing that's Linux based is just asking for someone to open it up and tinker with it.


----------



## Wolffpack

cabanaboy1977 said:


> If you take a look at the UTV they have never made any hacks for it. The closest they come to a hack is being able to unlock the drive xfer the data to a new drive (I think they might have a way to play the video's now but still no way to xfer them to a normal format). And this has been around for years now. I think Tyler's right it's not that D* disabled the Tivo functions it's that the product was Linux based. Heck look at Xbox, those were hacked mostly because they where running a form of linux. If they had had there own file system like the R15 or the UTV I don't think it would have been hacked that easy. It still would have been hacked but it would have taken longer (every one wants to hack games no matter what the platform). In my opinion any thing that's Linux based is just asking for someone to open it up and tinker with it.


As mentioned before, what is better for the product, provider and customer? I unit based on a proven OS (Linuix) with proven dependable filesystems (which will be more hackable) or a unit based on a yet unknown OS (VxWorks has been rumored) and a unproven filesystem (at least in the term of real time based high volume digital data storage), which may be less hackable. I believe that everyone would agree that the R15 seems to be overworked when a customer has 20-25 SLs. Showcases haven't even been enabled yet. IMO going with a lessor known OS and filesystem could lead to performance problems such as we're seeing on the R15.

Plus, once again, if a unit can provide"out of the box" functionality to transfer programs to a PC (with associated security) in addition to the ability to expand the HD space, there's less of a need for hacking.


----------



## cabanaboy1977

Wolffpack said:


> I believe that everyone would agree that the R15 seems to be overworked when a customer has 20-25 SLs. Showcases haven't even been enabled yet. IMO going with a lessor known OS and filesystem could lead to performance problems such as we're seeing on the R15.


That makes sense. Do you know what file system the UTV was on?



Wolffpack said:


> Plus, once again, if a unit can provide"out of the box" functionality to transfer programs to a PC (with associated security) in addition to the ability to expand the HD space, there's less of a need for hacking.


Very true.


----------



## ApK

wbmccarty said:


> Shucks, that's no fun. What happened to detecting the Tempest radiation of the IDE bus, extracting and decoding the video data, and pushing it to the iPod via a quantum interface?


Hey, van Eck phreaking! Cool! I haven't heard anyone speak of that since I read Cryptonomicon!

ApK


----------



## wbmccarty

ApK said:


> I haven't heard anyone speak of that since I read Cryptonomicon!


I've never read it, at least in this universe. I'll check it out. Thanks!


----------



## wbmccarty

cabanaboy1977 said:


> If they had had there own file system like the R15 or the UTV I don't think it would have been hacked that easy.


In general, it's not that hard to hack a file system. One reason for this is that it's pretty rare for a development team to create a new file system from scratch; they're more likely to modify an existing file system to better suit their needs than the original. And, even if one _had_ to have a custom file system, that wouldn't demand use of an OS other than Linux. It's relatively easy to adapt Linux to use a new file system.


----------



## cabanaboy1977

wbmccarty said:


> In general, it's not that hard to hack a file system. One reason for this is that it's pretty rare for a development team to create a new file system from scratch; they're more likely to modify an existing file system to better suit their needs than the original. And, even if one _had_ to have a custom file system, that wouldn't demand use of an OS other than Linux. It's relatively easy to adapt Linux to use a new file system.


So it's not the file system that the issue it's reading the files (and making sense of them) in another program?


----------



## wbmccarty

I'm not sure that I fully understand the question. So, as is my habit, I'll answer anyway. 

Reading a file demands the ability to read the associated file system. But, file systems aren't rocket science.

An operating system that supports a particular file system provides convenient ways to access a file system and the files it contains. So, a Linux-based appliance is easy to play with. If an appliance has an unfriendly OS, one may have to remove the drive from the appliance to reverse engineer or access its contents. This is _much_ harder. But, on the universal scale of difficulty, it's not all that bad. Slightly oversimplified, if you've seen one file system you've seen them all.


----------



## cabanaboy1977

That makes sense. 

What I trying to say/ask was is even if you can access the file you still need to make sense of it so you can edit/modify it to do what you want it to do. The edit/modify being the hard part.


----------



## wbmccarty

cabanaboy1977 said:


> What I trying to say/ask was is even if you can access the file you still need to make sense of it so you can edit/modify it to do what you want it to do. The edit/modify being the hard part.


Oh, sure. Once you get the file you have only a stream (series) of data values that represent compressed, encoded video information. The data may even be encrypted, though that's unlikely because encrypting and decrypting data place heavy demands on a processor. It'd be way (prohibitively, I think) costly to come up with a completely novel encoding. If one _was_ used, it would likely be a major pain to crack it without the help of a friendly OS.

But, it can't be that hard to crack and tame the OS itself since there'd be no cost-feasible way to build a novel OS from the ground up merely for use in such an appliance. Underneath the icing, just about every common OS is Unix-like, even recent Microsoft OSs.

P.S. To be clear and explicit, I'm not advocating acts that may be illegal in some jurisdictions. I'm merely commenting on factors that might affect the difficulty of such acts.


----------



## cabanaboy1977

wbmccarty said:


> Oh, sure. Once you get the file you have only a stream (series) of data values that represent compressed, encoded video information. The data may even be encrypted, though that's unlikely because encrypting and decrypting data place heavy demands on a processor. It'd be way (prohibitively, I think) costly to come up with a completely novel encoding. If one _was_ used, it would likely be a major pain to crack it without the help of a friendly OS.
> 
> But, it can't be that hard to crack and tame the OS itself since there'd be no cost-feasible way to build a novel OS from the ground up merely for use in such an appliance. Underneath the icing, just about every common OS is Unix-like, even recent Microsoft OSs.
> 
> P.S. To be clear and explicit, I'm not advocating acts that may be illegal in some jurisdictions. I'm merely commenting on factors that might affect the difficulty of such acts.


That makes sense too. Thanks for clearing that up for me.


----------



## walters

wbmccarty said:


> The data may even be encrypted, though that's unlikely because encrypting and decrypting data place heavy demands on a processor.


For what it's worth TiVo does encrypt the data (using a separate chip). This is why you must do a "clear and delete all" when you put a hard drive in a different (but otherwise identical) machine, and it's how they protect multiroom viewing, etc.


----------



## harsh

wbmccarty said:


> So, I think it's a safe bet that data within the R15 is quite vulnerable to access should anyone with sufficient skill and determination take on the project.


Because there is software involved, it is conceivable that the target will be a moving one. This adds orders of magnitude of difficulty to the challenge.

The motivation is every bit as great to protect the data as it is to compromise the protection. The distributor doesn't want to risk their relationship with the program providers by allowing the digital recordings to get out in the wild.


----------



## harsh

wbmccarty said:


> But, it can't be that hard to crack and tame the OS itself since there'd be no cost-feasible way to build a novel OS from the ground up merely for use in such an appliance. Underneath the icing, just about every common OS is Unix-like, even recent Microsoft OSs.


There are a number of suitable "embedded" operating systems that aren't based on *nix or Windows. There's no need to ground-up something. Many of these alternatives also offer a level of platform independence that you're not as likely to find in the *nix or Windows domain.


----------



## mikewolf13

Ok, admittedly (and obviously, if you read my posts). I am an idiot.

I don't understand all this mumbo-jumbo except on a primitive level.

My question is this: Since D* plans to allow for content form DVRs to be viewable on Microsoft OS and Playforsure devices and XBoxs (according to 10-K SEC filing)...shouldn't it be relatively easy to decipher/crack?..... If you know that a Playforsure device has to be able to read the file..shouldn't it be easy knowing how they work to decipher a file system it is going to have to use files from...

Easy for people who know what they are talking abou tthat is...not me....


----------



## cabanaboy1977

harsh said:


> The motivation is every bit as great to protect the data as it is to compromise the protection. The distributor doesn't want to risk their relationship with the program providers by allowing the digital recordings to get out in the wild.


The R15 has one other thing in it's favor for making it harder to hack, that the Tivo's don't is it upgrades via the Sat not the phone line. If someone does crack the box they can update the system and the user really has no choice but to get the update or not get D* service. I think the distributors see that in a good light.


----------



## wbmccarty

harsh said:


> There are a number of suitable "embedded" operating systems that aren't based on *nix or Windows.


Yes, I didn't mean that other OSs are based on Unix or Windows in the sense that you seem to mean. That's too strong a claim. What I meant is that the system calls of many (most? all?) OSs functionally parallel those of Unix. So, at that rather low level, they look like Unix. Another way of looking at the issue is to consider that all (popular) OSs fundamentally do pretty much the same things. If you push the concept of similarity to include, for instance, a Unix-like shell that provides tools for manipulaiing text as the basic organizing principle of the system, my argument does begin to fall apart. I didn't intend going that far.


----------



## wbmccarty

harsh said:


> Because there is software involved, it is conceivable that the target will be a moving one. This adds orders of magnitude of difficulty to the challenge.


In general, I'd agree with your claim. But, I wouldn't place any bets on DTV's ability to timely modify the software to accomplish any particular goal, let alone the closing of a vulnerability. In my opinion, they've demonstrated a relative lack--perhaps even a complete absence--of the necessary capabilities.


----------



## wbmccarty

walters said:


> For what it's worth TiVo does encrypt the data (using a separate chip). This is why you must do a "clear and delete all" when you put a hard drive in a different (but otherwise identical) machine, and it's how they protect multiroom viewing, etc.


Yes, a dedicated hardware encryption device can evade the effect of my argument. But, I don't recall that the R15 is known to contain such a chip. Even if it does, such a facility could present formidable difficulties only in principle. I'd wager that the use of the facility in the R15 is such that serious vulnerabilities are present. I simply haven't seen the opposite case in any other system of substantial complexity that contains as many functional bugs as the R15. Actually, I'm not sure that I've seen any other system that contains as many functional bugs as the R15--Windows 95, perhaps.


----------



## wbmccarty

mikewolf13 said:


> I don't understand all this mumbo-jumbo except on a primitive level.


No one really understands, or we'd be able to deliver such products having many fewer defects and vulnerabilities than now possible.



mikewolf13 said:


> My question is this: Since D* plans to allow for content form DVRs to be viewable on Microsoft OS and Playforsure devices and XBoxs (according to 10-K SEC filing)...shouldn't it be relatively easy to decipher/crack?..... If you know that a Playforsure device has to be able to read the file..shouldn't it be easy knowing how they work to decipher a file system it is going to have to use files from...


We're told the R15 will be able to export video to certain other devices. Presumably, the R15 will attempt to identify the devices and will export a video stream only to an authorized device having some mininum level of security adequate to protect the content. Such a device should enforce these restrictions by using a hardware mechanism, otherwise the security can be compromised by modifying the software. A PC lacks hardware mechanisms for enforcing restrictions. Any data that resides on a PC (and that can be read by some program on that PC) can ultimately be compromised. This is probably the weakest link in such a system.


----------



## JAWheat411

Ok I guess I will get this thing back on track.

The only way at the moment that I can see to copy video from the R15 to an ipod is as follows:

1) Get a TV tuner card for your pc
2) Plug an output from your R15 or VCR or whatever to your TV.
3) Play the video and capture it with a video capturing software of choice, something as simple as Virtualdub will do. (more likely VirtualdubMod, since it is mpeg2.. I think).
4) Then convert it to ipod video specs. I am sure there are several programs out there just for this.
I do this sometimes for tv show backups.
*
** Mods if this is against the rules please remove. Shouldn't be since it isn't hacking ****


----------



## Clint Lamor

JAWheat411 said:


> Ok I guess I will get this thing back on track.
> 
> The only way at the moment that I can see to copy video from the R15 to an ipod is as follows:
> 
> 1) Get a TV tuner card for your pc
> 2) Plug an output from your R15 or VCR or whatever to your TV.
> 3) Play the video and capture it with a video capturing software of choice, something as simple as Virtualdub will do. (more likely VirtualdubMod, since it is mpeg2.. I think).
> 4) Then convert it to ipod video specs. I am sure there are several programs out there just for this.
> I do this sometimes for tv show backups.
> *
> ** Mods if this is against the rules please remove. Shouldn't be since it isn't hacking ****


I think all of what you are talking about is perfectly legal and are all very good ways to get what you want.


----------



## Wolffpack

wbmccarty said:


> I'm not sure that I fully understand the question. So, as is my habit, I'll answer anyway.
> 
> Reading a file demands the ability to read the associated file system. But, file systems aren't rocket science.
> 
> An operating system that supports a particular file system provides convenient ways to access a file system and the files it contains. So, a Linux-based appliance is easy to play with. If an appliance has an unfriendly OS, one may have to remove the drive from the appliance to reverse engineer or access its contents. This is _much_ harder. But, on the universal scale of difficulty, it's not all that bad. Slightly oversimplified, if you've seen one file system you've seen them all.


I've done some digging into the filesystem on the R15. If you're interested check out this link.

In short, the filesystem is appears to be based on the FAT32 filesysystem, expanded. I believe it's the ERTFS Pro or ERTFS Pro+64 filesystem. It can be read when mounted on a Linux system other than the actual video/audio stream data. Using the stock FAT32 drivers available on Linux returns a read error when trying to access that stream data.

If one were to purchase the ERTFS drivers from EBS they would probably have better access to that data. I believe the pricing for these drivers/utilities are about $5,000. I've not been able to find drivers for ERTFS available anywhere on the net. Anyway, the thread above goes into more detail on what I've found.


----------



## wbmccarty

Wolffpack said:


> In short, the filesystem is appears to be based on the FAT32 filesysystem, expanded. I believe it's the ERTFS Pro or ERTFS Pro+64 filesystem. It can be read when mounted on a Linux system other than the actual video/audio stream data. Using the stock FAT32 drivers available on Linux returns a read error when trying to access that stream data.


My guess is that the file table entries that appear to point to the stream data are actually pointers into a linked-list (or other simple data structure) that contains the actual data. I can't comment much more than that, because the Digitial Millenium Copyright Act prohibits many forms of reverse engineering. One exception is reverse engineering for interoperability. But, I'm not confident of being able to successfully invoke that safe harbor when the planned interoperation involves removing the hard drive from the R15. 

If I were faced with a similar task that had no related legal obstacles, I'd do the following dance:

1. Zero a drive, dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/hdx
2. Copy the few sectors (72, as I recall) needed to initialize the drive, from a drive in the target host
3. Insert the drive in the target host and record one short program
4. Remove the drive and analyze its contents

During analysis, I'd look in particular at the file table entries for the video data files and consider the hypothesis that they contain CCCHHSSS, relative byte address, or offsets into a disk area used to store video. I'd anticipate success.


----------



## Dan East

cabanaboy1977 said:


> Heck look at Xbox, those were hacked mostly because they where running a form of linux.


If Bill Gates gets wind of that post he will personally come to your house and kick your hind end.

Dan East


----------



## wbmccarty

Dan East said:


> If Bill Gates gets wind of that post he will personally come to your house and kick your hind end.


No, Bill and his buddy Ballmer were the authors of the specious claim that Linux is inherently insecure. They'd shake the hand of anyone suggesting that use of Linux contributed to inadequate security.


----------

