X
Tech

Latest AACS Processing Key released

The cat and mouse game between the hackers and the AACS Licensing Authority continues as the latest MKB v3 Processing Key is released onto the web.
Written by Adrian Kingsley-Hughes, Senior Contributing Editor

The cat and mouse game between the hackers and the AACS Licensing Authority continues as the latest MKB v3 Processing Key is released onto the web.

This latest key can be used to decrypt all newly released (and future releases, for a while at least) HD DVD and Blu-ray discs.  This public release of the Processing Key comes shortly after Slysoft released an updated version of AnyDVD HD which could defeat the MKB v3 copy-protection used on the latest titles.

I'm noticing a shift in how the hacker community is working now compared to a few months ago.  Back when they started cracking AACS the community was open and posting details of how they were getting hold of the keys necessary to break AACS, now a shadow of secrecy has descended over the forums, as this quote by hacker arnezami shows:

I strongly advise everybody who knows how it was retrieved not to talk about it publicly.

This suggests to me that the hackers would rather not let the AACS LA know how they came across this key, probably so that a vulnerable software player isn't again revoked.

So, MKB v3 has been defeated.  What next for AACS?  Well, I guess there are a number of options open to them.  They could decide to update the processing key again, or maybe next time AACS will release multiple keys rather than relying on the one.  Maybe Blu-ray discs will start to make use of the BD+ DRM mechanism.  Maybe the AACS LA will try something altogether new.  What I'm interested in knowing is how long AACS LA will keep up the fight before declaring AACS broken and allowing it to go the way of CSS for DVD. 

The battle between the hackers and the AACS LA could go on for years or it could be over in months.

Oh, and before you think of submitting this new Processing Key to Digg, it's already been done ...

Thoughts?

Editorial standards