Hackers Release PlayStation 3 "LV0 Decryption Keys"

[RJ 17]

If breaking the TOS is a crime, I honestly don't give a shit. If I want to break open my PS3 you bet your ass that I will and no TOS or bad law will prevent that.

Releasing it to the world is the real issue here, not that some people tinker with their PS3.

Now who sounds like they're getting all worked up?

Look, I don't care what you do in your own time, as I said, it doesn't effect me. I don't have a dog in this fight as I don't even own a PS3 to begin with. All I'm saying is that there's a difference between playing a game for the challenge and hacking for a challenge: one is a crime (or at the very least negetively affects other people), the other does not.

Now if your self-righteous attitude places you above the trivialities of legal contracts, well that's your business. All I'm saying is that the letter of the law disagrees with you.

I do find it interesting, though, that you differentiate between hacking and releasing the information that was hacked. You're saying that releasing the information is bad...right? Well doesn't that mean that gaining such information to begin with was probably bad too? Suppose a bank robber (i.e. the original hacker) robs a bank just for the hell of it and then distributes the money from said robbery to a bunch of other bank robbers (i.e. people with modded consoles) so that they can use that money to better equip themselves for robbing banks (i.e. using their consoles in ways that violate the TOS agreement)...are you saying that the crime was not the origina bank robbery to begin with, but rather it is that the original bank robber was enabling the rest of the bank robbers?

Again, just shootin' the breeze with you here. This is quite honestly the first time I've ever discussed modding and hacking consoles. I just find your logic to be faulty, but ultimately it really is no big deal to me what you do.

 

[Epona]

Oh so now we are talking about morality? I say people should be able to tinker with their own property. Releasing it to the world is a sticky thing though.

You can do whatever you want with your own property. That however has nothing at all to do with this article. You do not own the software that comes on your ps3.

1) Pay attention, someone asked why anyone hacks in the first place.

2) Like games, I own the copy of the software on the PS3. You must be one of those people who have been fooled into believing you are paying $60 for a rental. Here's a question for you, if you don't own that copy of the software, then why would you own the hardware? Both are proprietary.

 

[Epona]

If breaking the TOS is a crime, I honestly don't give a shit. If I want to break open my PS3 you bet your ass that I will and no TOS or bad law will prevent that.

Releasing it to the world is the real issue here, not that some people tinker with their PS3.

Now who sounds like they're getting all worked up?

Look, I don't care what you do in your own time, as I said, it doesn't effect me. I don't have a dog in this fight as I don't even own a PS3 to begin with. All I'm saying is that there's a difference between playing a game for the challenge and hacking for a challenge: one is a crime (or at the very least negetively affects other people), the other does not.

Now if your self-righteous attitude places you above the trivialities of legal contracts, well that's your business. All I'm saying is that the letter of the law disagrees with you.

I do find it interesting, though, that you differentiate between hacking and releasing the information that was hacked. You're saying that releasing the information is bad...right? Well doesn't that mean that gaining such information to begin with was probably bad too? Suppose a bank robber (i.e. the original hacker) robs a bank just for the hell of it and then distributes the money from said robbery to a bunch of other bank robbers (i.e. people with modded consoles) so that they can use that money to better equip themselves for robbing banks (i.e. using their consoles in ways that violate the TOS agreement)...are you saying that the crime was not the origina bank robbery to begin with, but rather it is that the original bank robber was enabling the rest of the bank robbers?

Again, just shootin' the breeze with you here. This is quite honestly the first time I've ever discussed modding and hacking consoles. I just find your logic to be faulty, but ultimately it really is no big deal to me what you do.

I am not going to ruin my night fighting over this shit. You want to be all self righteous about protecting Sony while CLAIMING that it's a crime for a consumer to tinker with his own property, you go right ahead.

 

[RJ 17]

I am not going to ruin my night fighting over this shit. You want to be all self righteous about protecting Sony while CLAIMING that it's a crime for a consumer to tinker with his own property, you go right ahead.

I'm sorry, when did I say I was defending Sony? I originally made a question of why hackers hack. You offered an answer to that question, and all I've done since then is question the logic behind your answer. But apparently you can't admit that your logic is flawed, nor have you paid attention the the numerous times that I've said:

I don't care what you do. It has no effect upon me. I'm not attacking you for modding your console.

I do have to say I find it funny that YOU'RE the one getting pissed off about this now. But honestly I did not come here to start a fight, you just kinda threw yourself into one. So lets go ahead and call it quits here, and I'll wish you a very pleasant evening. :3

Edit: Oh, and for the record, I haven't been "claiming" anything. Breaking a TOS agreement is a clear violation of contract and subject to at the very least a lawsuit. You might not give a damn about that, and I really don't care that you don't give a damn about it. But the fact remains that there's nothing debateable about breaking a contract equating to breaking a contract.

 

[Epona]

I am not going to ruin my night fighting over this shit. You want to be all self righteous about protecting Sony while CLAIMING that it's a crime for a consumer to tinker with his own property, you go right ahead.

I'm sorry, when did I say I was defending Sony? I originally made a question of why hackers hack. You offered an answer to that question, and all I've done since then is question the logic behind your answer. But apparently you can't admit that your logic is flawed, nor have you paid attention the the numerous times that I've said:

I don't care what you do. It has no effect upon me. I'm not attacking you for modding your console.

I do have to say I find it funny that YOU'RE the one getting pissed off about this now. But honestly I did not come here to start a fight, you just kinda threw yourself into one. So lets go ahead and call it quits here, and I'll wish you a very pleasant evening. :3

I am ignoring all the other shit because I didn't want to discuss the ins and outs of EULA's, too many brainwashed people ready to give away all their consumer rights for my patience.

So are you really denying that hackers hack for the challenge?

 

[RJ 17]

I am ignoring all the other shit because I didn't want to discuss the ins and outs of EULA's, too many brainwashed people ready to give away all their consumer rights for my patience.

So are you really denying that hackers hack for the challenge?

Not at all. In fact, if you look back to my original response to your original answer:

Hackers hack because they like the challenge, why do you play games?

I understand the "they like the challenge" argument as it's always fun to take something that someone said can't be done and go ahead and do it anyways.

I say that I fully understand that aspect of it. All I've been saying - the entire point of the rest of that post and every post after - is that your equating the challenge of hacking to the challenge of a videogame is completely flawed. One has clear victims, the other one does not.

 

[chadachada123]

more prove of the fact that sercurity updates wont work agianst pirates. better make your product worth buying instead of pirating.

That's such a cop out answer these days. The pirated version is free. What do you need to provide, as a new developer, to be able to beat that? People pirate INDIE games, for fucks sake, they aren't going to come over all moral because "WE NOW DECIDED THE PRODUCT WAS WORTH PAYING FOR ALL OF A SUDDEN BECAUSE REASONS, AND SUCH".

Extra DRM isn't going to help stop pirates.

Anyway, making a better product isn't about stopping piracy: It's about making piracy LESS common. You will never stop pirates, you will rarely even slow them down with bullshit DRM or strongarm tactics. All you can hope to do as a developer is convince the people that pirate from large publishers that you, personally, are worth throwing money at, that it would be a dick thing to pirate your product if they have money to spare.

It's the same reason Nine Inch Nails can give new albums for free and still make millions in completely optional donations: They have a product worth throwing money at, and an attitude to match.

 

[Epona]

I am ignoring all the other shit because I didn't want to discuss the ins and outs of EULA's, too many brainwashed people ready to give away all their consumer rights for my patience.

So are you really denying that hackers hack for the challenge?

Not at all. In fact, if you look back to my original response to your original answer:

Hackers hack because they like the challenge, why do you play games?

I understand the "they like the challenge" argument as it's always fun to take something that someone said can't be done and go ahead and do it anyways.

I say that I fully understand that aspect of it. All I've been saying - the entire point of the rest of that post and every post after - is that your equating the challenge of hacking to the challenge of a videogame is completely flawed. One has clear victims, the other one does not.

Then we agree on the only point I care to argue.

 

[RJ 17]

I am ignoring all the other shit because I didn't want to discuss the ins and outs of EULA's, too many brainwashed people ready to give away all their consumer rights for my patience.

So are you really denying that hackers hack for the challenge?

Not at all. In fact, if you look back to my original response to your original answer:

Hackers hack because they like the challenge, why do you play games?

I understand the "they like the challenge" argument as it's always fun to take something that someone said can't be done and go ahead and do it anyways.

I say that I fully understand that aspect of it. All I've been saying - the entire point of the rest of that post and every post after - is that your equating the challenge of hacking to the challenge of a videogame is completely flawed. One has clear victims, the other one does not.

Then we agree on the only point I care to argue.

Fair enough. As I said: have a pleasant evening.

 

[ripdajacker]

The research done in PS3 security was motivated by the ability to run Linux on it (a feature Sony removed all of the sudden some years back). This leak is just the conclusion.

Sony will surely be able to blacklist units with hacked firmware from PSN(as does Microsoft with JTAG hacked Xbox units).

Will it make piracy easier? Sure. Will it make it easy for your average gamer? Probably not.

Sony will probably react to this with new DRM, more phoning home etc. I personally love tinkering with these things, so I am looking forward to bring new life to my paperweight of a PS3.

 

[Epona]

I am ignoring all the other shit because I didn't want to discuss the ins and outs of EULA's, too many brainwashed people ready to give away all their consumer rights for my patience.

So are you really denying that hackers hack for the challenge?

Not at all. In fact, if you look back to my original response to your original answer:

Hackers hack because they like the challenge, why do you play games?

I understand the "they like the challenge" argument as it's always fun to take something that someone said can't be done and go ahead and do it anyways.

I say that I fully understand that aspect of it. All I've been saying - the entire point of the rest of that post and every post after - is that your equating the challenge of hacking to the challenge of a videogame is completely flawed. One has clear victims, the other one does not.

Then we agree on the only point I care to argue.

Fair enough. As I said: have a pleasant evening.

You too.

To avoid a low content warning:

I do think (and I don't want to argue this with anyone) that no one last gen even considered that they didn't own the games they bought. People should probably look back and figure out why they feel that way now. Figure out when and how they have been manipulated to give up ownership of games and hardware.

 

[Owyn_Merrilin]

I say this as I listen to my music collection being streamed from my homebrew enabled Wii to my stereo system: welcome, PS3 owning homebrewers. It's about time you made it.

 

[direkiller]

more prove of the fact that sercurity updates wont work agianst pirates. better make your product worth buying instead of pirating.

That's such a cop out answer these days. The pirated version is free. What do you need to provide, as a new developer, to be able to beat that? People pirate INDIE games, for fucks sake, they aren't going to come over all moral because "WE NOW DECIDED THE PRODUCT WAS WORTH PAYING FOR ALL OF A SUDDEN BECAUSE REASONS, AND SUCH".

people pay out the ass for convenience
just look at steam in Russia for an example

 

[ResonanceSD]

more prove of the fact that sercurity updates wont work agianst pirates. better make your product worth buying instead of pirating.

That's such a cop out answer these days. The pirated version is free. What do you need to provide, as a new developer, to be able to beat that? People pirate INDIE games, for fucks sake, they aren't going to come over all moral because "WE NOW DECIDED THE PRODUCT WAS WORTH PAYING FOR ALL OF A SUDDEN BECAUSE REASONS, AND SUCH".

people pay out the ass for convenience
just look at steam in Russia for an example

Again, the competition is a free digital download.

What exactly is the point you're making?

 

[RJ 17]

I do think (and I don't want to argue this with anyone) that no one last gen even considered that they didn't own the games they bought. People should probably look back and figure out why they feel that way now. Figure out when and how they have been manipulated to give up ownership of games and hardware.

I understand your stance, all I'm saying is that there's no arguing against my point: when you purchase a PS3, it comes with a TOS that you have to agree to. If you don't agree to it, "technically" you shouldn't be playing it. If you do agree to it, then "technically" you agree not to mess with the PS3. Just because you're now the proud owner of a PS3 that is indeed all yours does not suddenly nullify the TOS contract that you agreed to when you bought it.

 

[ikillu87]

If breaking the TOS is a crime, I honestly don't give a shit.

I just want to point this little tid bit out.

"If". I pray your name does not imply your birth date, because if you've managed 39 years without being certain of the legality of a TOS, I question your intellect.
The TOS itself has more to do with your agreement on not altering their software than screwing with the hardware(which has its own legal problems, I won't get into), which you never actually own. You pretty much rent it permanently, on the condition you do not screw with it. Software goes under the idea of an intellectual property, something without a physical property, which is still copyrighted.

By hacking it, you are pretty much busting into someone's house and taking their crap.

The thing you're not understanding is that you never, under any circumstances, own the software. On top of that, you have given your word you will not hack it by clicking "I Agree" to a TOS. Hacking doesn't only make you a thief, it makes you a liar.

 

[BernardoOne]

Wow, you are getting worked up for nothing. You know is true, people hack because they enjoy the challenge. All that other bullshit you just wrote has nothing to do with what I said.

Oh, BTW, if it is a crime to tinker with your own property...it shouldn't be.

Oh just to be clear, I'm not worked up. Indeed, I really don't care as it has no effect on me whatsoever. However, you did equate the challenge of hacking to the challenge of a game, and I was simply showing the point that one is a crime and the other one isn't.

Oh, BTW, if you agree to a TOS saying that you won't tinker with the item that you purchased and you do anyway, you're committing a crime, if not at the very least guilty of breach of contract.

Honestly, at this point I'm just "arguing" for the sake of argument. Because I like the challenge!

TOS, especially in this case, are not legally binding, because you can buy a PS3 without ever being presented the TOS, thus making it invalid.

 

[RJ 17]

Wow, you are getting worked up for nothing. You know is true, people hack because they enjoy the challenge. All that other bullshit you just wrote has nothing to do with what I said.

Oh, BTW, if it is a crime to tinker with your own property...it shouldn't be.

Oh just to be clear, I'm not worked up. Indeed, I really don't care as it has no effect on me whatsoever. However, you did equate the challenge of hacking to the challenge of a game, and I was simply showing the point that one is a crime and the other one isn't.

Oh, BTW, if you agree to a TOS saying that you won't tinker with the item that you purchased and you do anyway, you're committing a crime, if not at the very least guilty of breach of contract.

Honestly, at this point I'm just "arguing" for the sake of argument. Because I like the challenge!

TOS, especially in this case, are not legally binding, because you can buy a PS3 without ever being presented the TOS, thus making it invalid.

Now this I will give you since I don't own a PS3 and thus don't know the format. All I know is that the 360 has a TOS pop up to which you have to click "I Agree", which equates to an electronic signature which is indeed legally binding.

If the PS3 does not have such a TOS pop-up as soon as you turn it on for the first time, then by all means: hack it to pieces.

 

[Epona]

If breaking the TOS is a crime, I honestly don't give a shit.

I just want to point this little tid bit out.

"If". I pray your name does not imply your birth date, because if you've managed 39 years without being certain of the legality of a TOS, I question your intellect.
The TOS itself has more to do with your agreement on not altering their software than screwing with the hardware(which has its own legal problems, I won't get into), which you never actually own. You pretty much rent it permanently, on the condition you do not screw with it. Software goes under the idea of an intellectual property, something without a physical property, which is still copyrighted.

By hacking it, you are pretty much busting into someone's house and taking their crap.

The thing you're not understanding is that you never, under any circumstances, own the software. On top of that, you have given your word you will not by clicking "I Agree" to a TOS. Hacking doesn't only make you a thief, it makes you a liar.

Permanently renting??? Holy shit, LOL!

Couldn't resist!

 

[BernardoOne]

Wow, you are getting worked up for nothing. You know is true, people hack because they enjoy the challenge. All that other bullshit you just wrote has nothing to do with what I said.

Oh, BTW, if it is a crime to tinker with your own property...it shouldn't be.

Oh just to be clear, I'm not worked up. Indeed, I really don't care as it has no effect on me whatsoever. However, you did equate the challenge of hacking to the challenge of a game, and I was simply showing the point that one is a crime and the other one isn't.

Oh, BTW, if you agree to a TOS saying that you won't tinker with the item that you purchased and you do anyway, you're committing a crime, if not at the very least guilty of breach of contract.

Honestly, at this point I'm just "arguing" for the sake of argument. Because I like the challenge!

TOS, especially in this case, are not legally binding, because you can buy a PS3 without ever being presented the TOS, thus making it invalid.

Now this I will give you since I don't own a PS3 and thus don't know the format. All I know is that the 360 has a TOS pop up to which you have to click "I Agree", which equates to an electronic signature which is indeed legally binding.

If the PS3 does not have such a TOS pop-up as soon as you turn it on for the first time, then by all means: hack it to pieces.

It doesnt have any TOS popping up. You only have to agree to a TOS when registering a PSN account. So legally the only thing I think they could do is ban you from PSN for breaking their TOS(and in that case they have the full right to do so)