Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!seismo!rutgers!labrea!decwrl!decvax!ucbvax!hplabs!hplabsz!dleigh
From: dleigh@hplabsz.HPL.HP.COM (Darren Leigh)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga
Subject: Re: Copy protection: A marketing analysis
Message-ID: <575@hplabsz.HPL.HP.COM>
Date: Mon, 20-Jul-87 20:45:05 EDT
Article-I.D.: hplabsz.575
Posted: Mon Jul 20 20:45:05 1987
Date-Received: Wed, 22-Jul-87 04:35:58 EDT
References: <207@cc5.bbn.com.BBN.COM> <892@omepd> <1393@mit-amt.MEDIA.MIT.EDU>
Distribution: na
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Laboratories
Lines: 65

In article <1393@mit-amt.MEDIA.MIT.EDU>, ralph@mit-atrp.UUCP (Amiga-Man) writes:
> In article <892@omepd> hah@mipon3.UUCP (Hans Hansen) writes:
> >lies with Commodore.  The Amiga should have had an ID ROM in each machine
> >that is unique from all others.  All programmers that felt the need to protect
> >their programs would then burry the cusotmers ID within the program the first
> >time it was loaded.

> [ . . . ]
> And, secondarily, how about this idea: each person buys a *single* dongle
> which only contains a user "serial" number. It's the only one plugged
> into the machine, and all programs use it the same. When you first get the
> disk it is all copy protected to heck, and you perform a simple "installation"
> which makes note of you serial number and makes the software only work
> with that serial. Now if you want to visit your buddies and show them some
> programs you just *bought*, you merely bring along yer dongle (sounds
> wierd :-) ). If you loose it, no problem. It's just like car keys. You have
> the serial number someplace, and you get a new set of keys (dongle) cut (made).

Having some sort of unmodifiable code number internal to the computer
itself is probably the best solution I've heard yet.  It would allow
for very good copy protection and, with some cute hacking, could be
made virtually uncrackable (code number checks at random times, subtly
altering the program so that it uses the code number as data and runs
wrong if the data is wrong;  i.e. it should be more than a go/no-go
check).  The only real problems I can see with this are:

1.  Some user set-up time the first time the program is run.
    (Really not a problem)

2.  Being unable to run your bought software on a friend's machine.


Amiga-man's idea of a single, personal dongle is probably not a good
one.  Very soon after the system's introduction someone will start
marketing dongles with switches for manually keying in the code
numbers (for software development and testing purposes of course :-).
All the pirates will have to do is post the proper code numbers along
with the programs.  And since pirates are not stupid, there will
undoubtedly be standard "pirate" code numbers to keep the software
theives from having to change numbers all the time.

There is, and can be, no perfect copy protection method.  Anything can
be cracked.  Even an internal code can be faked or modified, but not
as easily or safely as a disk or a dongle.  I think potential pirates
would be very deterred by the thought of blowing up their own hardware
in an attempt to change the internal password.

I, too, am in favor of copy protection only when it doesn't
inconvenience the legitimate user.  I am very much against software
that comes on mangled disks or that requires a mangled disk as a key.
It sure would be nice to live in a world with no copy protection,
and where the source code comes in the box.  Sigh.  Damn theives. 


Darren Leigh
dleigh@hplabs.hp.com
or
dlleigh@media-lab.mit.edu

DISCLAIMER:  The preceding opinions are mine, but may be freely shared
             by anyone.

WHINE:  I want an Amiga!  Somebody please buy my XT clone so that I
        can afford one.  Please!  I'll write lots of great PD software,
        I promise!