PS3 security is "epic fail"

[stefcep2]

I have to say I dont like the attitude on here, of them coders and off other sites towards Sony, they make the ps3 its their product so they get to decide what should and shouldn't be allowed on it, if you don't like it, dont support them and get your self a cheap Linux box for all your home brew you could ask for.  
 

 One the main reason I have not got a apple product, like the iphone or an ipad is because of its controlling nature and not allow flash and other things, shore I could buy their product and get it hacked to allow me to use some of this stuff, but then I'm supporting the company that I don't really agree with. Thats why I'm much more interested in company that are a lot more open like http://www.fungp.com/ and supporting them.
 

 I'm pretty sure the only reason that OtherOS was removed was due to hack made with that option being open, so they had to close it off, but once one way is found around the hack usually loads more follow so I'm not surprised its happened, I just dont agree with the way the hacker are spinning it that the only reason they did it was due to Sony pulling linux support.  
 
Still at least they got blue ray to protect it kind off, as to download 50gb games will take ages and the extra expense of blue ray still make ps3 bit of a problem for pirates, which I'm happy about.
 
 Everyone says that piracy doest do any harm to these big multimillion pound companies and they deserver it, but everyone forgets about the middle men, I mean recently where I live Blockbuster has closed down and gaming, cds and dvd sections are disappearing off the shelves, why partly because of things going digital, mp3 etc, plus online shopping but I think a bigger reason for it happing so quick is because more and more people are pirating games and movies.  

I agree with all this.  The standard BS argument is:"I bought it so I can do what I want with it".  No.  You bought hardware plus an agreement on what you could and could not do with that hardware.  Sony has the right to take steps that ensure the hardware is used as it intended, even if that means to add or remove features-like support for OtherOS.  You don't agree? Don't buy the hardware.

BTW all those up in arms about Linux support being removed is just a red herring: the % would be miniscule, there are cheaper an better ways to run Linux, and if you don't upgrade the firmware, you can still do it, but then you won't get Sony's FREE online service, but why would that matter, you can run Linux, right?

Yeah, and our Blockbuster is gone too.  

I also believe its why so many publisher gave up on the Amiga more quickly because piracy was pretty bad on the Amiga, I mean you had all the tools to make copies of software with every Amiga sold.

Amiga was and is a dirty word to many software houses for this very reason.  The ratio I've read is anywhere from 10:1 to 20:1 Pirated:Genuine.  It was even happening when the platform was on its last legs and the big names had left, and all we had was the odd bedroom programming team, or small independent programmers publishing on their own or through small publishers.

[stefcep2]

I totally agree with this.  Hacking stuff is the Amiga way, and as I was brought up with Amiga computers, that's the way I am.  That's why I can't stand to use Apple products.

If it weren't for talented hackers, we'd never have enjoyed all of the brilliant aftermarket products that we've seen for the Amiga over the years.  That's what being an Amiga user is all about!

AH.

The last time the owners of Amiga made any money would have been, oh I dunno, about 1992.

[stefcep2]

That doesn't really contradict anything he said.

He's on to something though.

An open system will continue to grow and develop in all sorts of interesting directions. A closed system will survive only as long as its developers make it so.

Be that as it may, the fact is the PS3 is made by a private manufacturer who owns the IP to the hardware, and the software that makes the hardware do things, (or the software that allows programmers to write software that make the hardware do things),  and part of the  purchase contract is that you can use it for it certain things.  I bet Sony has no objection to people writing homebrew or running Linux, if it weren't for the fcat that these activities will be used to do things that deprive Sony and its third party develpers of legitimate income. Not "might be", but WILL BE.

This was on the last page, but this isn't much different from what PC game developers are facing today. For OS and applications, piracy rates in north america (the lowest  region globally) are estimated at 40%. Games generally estimated at 90%, even in cases like the humble indie bundle, where you could pay as little as a damn dollar.

It has nothing to do with this or that platform. Rather, people as a general rule:
A: Want things for free
B: Feels they are entitled to said things for free, and can make up any number of excuses to do so (trust me, I've used my share)
C: Don't give a shit about the developers

Ditto.  Which is why I'm on Sony's side.  I work, I get paid.  Sony's engineers/third party developers work, but they don't deserve to be paid?

[stefcep2]

While I don't quite understand what this threads about, having never bought any of these consoles. It seems to me that when you purchase one you are prevented by the manufacturers from using the machine as how you see fit.

If that's the case then you'd be crazy to buy one in the first place and if you didn't know about such a restriction before you bought it and it doesn't clearly state anything on the packaging, then I'd demand my money back or Trading Standards and my MP would have to get busy... (again...)

Yes, but people don't.  They hack the machine, use it to deprive Sony and its deveopers a legitimate income, and then pull out this "denial of freedom" BS argument to justify what they are doing.

In Aus BTW, you have no consumer right for the product to do whatecer you want, only that the manufacturer has a duty to make the product do what its supposed to.

[stefcep2]

I agree that piracy is unfair.  I also conceed that piracy will now be a possibility due to the hacking work that has been done.

However, I will argue that the only reason the hacking work was done was because Sony took away a previously advertised feature that allowed users to run Linux on the system.  The hackers don't want piracy, all they want is to be able to run their Linux OS on it.

What concerns me is that the PS still does run Linux, but not if you update to the latest firmware, and they no longer get access to the FREE Sony network.  So IF their motivation is to run Linux then they still can.  

IMO its just a smokescreen to hide that the real motivation is to run pirated software.  As has been said already if you REALLY wanted to run Linux, then there are cheaper, simpler and better ways to do it than a PS3.

I don't believe for one moment that the hackers did it get back at Sony for removing OtherOS: they were going to do it anyway.

[stefcep2]

The product is supposed to run Linux.

i don't know what the original terms of this were in terms of for how long or the support offered by Sony for OtherOS was, but the PS3 is primarily a games console and this is why the vast majority of people buy it.

Those people who did buy it to specifically run OtherOS would probably have a case in that the PS3 doesn't do what its supposed to, but warranties/damages would be likely be limited to a refund on the purchase price, and those buyers would have that option to return their PS3's and get their money back.  BUT I BET THEY WON'T.

Just like the iPhone reception issues:  In Aus, Apple said if you're not happy with it, we'll give you a refund http://www.smh.com.au/digital-life/iphone/apple-offers-free-cases-refunds-to-iphone-4-owners-20100717-10ell.html.  But most people didn't, because the thing is so damned good, Apple basically called the bluff of everyone who wanted "compensation"..I bet this is what would happen with those who want the PS3 to run OtherOS.  And Sony know this too.

[stefcep2]

 Why not? That's what one pay for, right? Now you can decide for yourself what needs you have and run whatever firmware you like, it is how it should have been from the start from a customers POV.

From a customers POV?  There are two sides to any sale: the seller's and the  buyer's.  If the two agree on the price and other terms, the sale proceeds.  If not, both parties can go their seperate ways.  

About the only people that might feel aggrieved is those that purchased the first version PS3's to run Linux, and their compensation would be to get a refund when they return the hardware.

What is happening here is the buyer is altering the item in a way that will cause financial harm to the seller-not might, but WILL cause financial harm to the seller.  i don't see how you can justify this, really.

And for those who think Sony "deserve this" eg for removing OtherOS and the Audio Cd rootkit fiasco, you've just admitted that this will be used for none other than piracy, because running OtherOS won't harm them, so what else will if not piracy.

[stefcep2]

And why does this cause harm to the seller? Because, as I argued in an earlier post, Sony's business model is flawed. They're subsidizing the cost of their hardware with software. That was their decision, and the market is proving it to be a bad one. Technically, if I bought a PS3 and dumped it straight in the trash I'd be causing them the same financial harm, but no one would give me flak for that.

Once a product is out on the market, people will use it how they wish, EULAs be damned. It's where innovation comes from - repurposing and improving existing ideas. Look at this camera stabilizer made from pipes. That's not how the pipe manufacturer intended their pipes to be used, but do you think they're furious about it? No, they'd probably be delighted because it means more sales to consumers who might not ordinarily buy pipes - a new market segment. And it's instant profit, because their overhead costs are built into the price of their pipes.

In fact, take a look at just about anything at http://makezine.com. Or, closer to home, look at the Natami, which was derrived from a C-One board. These are all hacked and modified devices that most likely brought a little extra cash to the parts suppliers that might otherwise not have made those sales.

So if Sony is locking themselves out of this market - the market for hardware hackers, open-source enthusiasts, university researchers, cluster computing datacenters, governments - by failing to cost-reduce their hardware or to subsidize it from a less volatile corporate division, then it's their own damn fault for reaping the financial consequences when the market self-corrects to compensate for their shortsightedness.

And the piracy angle? Yeah, this might result in a bunch of 14-year-olds getting free games, but Sony really should have seen it coming; it's a fact of life. Pretty much every copy protection scheme ever designed has been cracked, so they need to be approaching anti-piracy the same way they'd approach poor sales - better marketing, lower software prices, better supply chain and stock management, promotions, and, dare I say it, better software products that people want to buy.

Do they "deserve" it? No, but they made a business decision and now they have to live with the consequences.

Let me get this straight:

It Sony's fault for putting a lock on their hardware to protect illegally copied software from running, and it was this action that FORCED the hackers to break that lock, plus its Sony's fault for making the PS3 too cheap and for not selling software at the price buyers want to pay, and its Sony's fault that people want their software for free?



So

1.  you have doors with locks in your house, or your businesses has doors with locks to the premises, and when a thief breaks in its your fault, because you fitted locks?

2.  I see a fridge I want to buy in a retail shop.  i walk in and want it for less.  The seller says no.  I drive a truck through the stores front door, take the fridge and leave the sum of money I wanted to pay for it, and this is OK, because its the retailers fault for not selling the fridge at the price I wanted to pay for it.  Afteral its just the market "self-correcting".  Sure, try that in front of a Court.

I've heard a lot of cocamamy justifications for piracy but this takes the cake:  its the IP owners fault.