• Register
  • Help
Page 1 of 19 123411 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 182

Topic: Since Steinberg has been hacked again ...

Share/Bookmark
  1. #1

    Since Steinberg has been hacked again ...

    I welcome you to CP Debate # 43,852,374. Enjoy your stay

    http://forum.nuendo.com/phpbb2/viewt...=4870&start=25

    So i guess Steinberg/Syncrosoft's current protection has been compromised ... so, it was a good run .... 10+ months without cracked versions. Surely, this did result in more sales ... but now they're back to square one ...

    And some interesting facts have arised ... quoting from the crackers ...

    Note to protection coders :

    Unbelievable way you transform an application. We estimate that
    between 30% & 40% of the application are wrapped in the script
    protection. Protection is one thing but this surely effects an
    application performance. You probably could get a performance gain of
    50% without the protection!!

    Think about this : Once broken, the protection is , what ????
    If this is true :: i find it terribly disturbing. Yes, yes ... so us, the PAYING customer is now not only paying in $$$'s and inconvenience, NOW we pay in performance ?? That is an outrage!!! Something else must be done!!! CP does not work, it may deter some, but this is not a solution!

    Take this for what it's worth - I, and others, as Mac users, pay the ultimate price, the platform we run on, is and will not be compromised ... dongle hacks, from what i have been told, do not exist for any OSX application. Logic has been crack free on Macs since v5. So, we end up with the short end of the stick, we pay for all the PeeCee thieves, and take the ultimate in performance hits. Considering, even paying Steinberg clients will vouch to use a cracked version of the software they PAYED for, simply because the dongle is a PITA, and now, they get a performance increase.

    Also, i find this quite ironic ... just yesterday, i was promted at the Nuendo forum to submit my dongle ID into my profile, it is now a registered user forum (finally!!!) - but this happens one day before the hack is released .. hmmmmm, does Steinberg know more than we are lead to believe ???

    So, now what ... ?

  2. #2

    Re: Since Steinberg has been hacked again ...

    There are much more efficient forms of CP, that in no way affect the performance or ease-of-use or are even that visable to the customer.

    It's not that I'm anti-dongle, I was a happy user of SX for many years, but I'm not pro-dongle either.
    Alan Lastufka | www.BelaDMedia.com
    Producer/Artistic Design | Content Producer

    20 Things

  3. #3

    Re: Since Steinberg has been hacked again ...

    Quote Originally Posted by Alan Lastufka
    There are much more efficient forms of CP, that in no way affect the performance or ease-of-use or are even that visable to the customer.

    It's not that I'm anti-dongle, I was a happy user of SX for many years, but I'm not pro-dongle either.
    Sure, efficient, yes ... but effective ... i dont think so - it was 10 months without a hack, that is very good. Simple challenge/response - a matter of days till it;s punk'd -

    The solution i guess is ... Pentium D and its new top-secret hardware copy-protection sceme that is embedded into the abyss of a motherboard.

  4. #4

    Re: Since Steinberg has been hacked again ...

    The Emulation is now done on driver-level, which means that the Emu
    essentially mimics a dongle, look in the License Control Center to
    view the applications the Emu supports. By writing the Emu at driver
    -level we probably went beyond cracking an application. The amount of
    effort invested in this project is staggering , estimated at over 1500
    manhours during cracking, developing & testing
    , and probably will
    never be done again.
    Developing & testing?

    Is this driver Microsoft-certified, or what?



    BTW, I'm a little suspicious of the "50% increase in performance" estimate. Just because "between 30% & 40% of the application are wrapped in the script protection" doesn't necessarily mean that it's inefficient. For example, if 50%, or every other, top-level "function" (e.g., play, insert plugin, open, close, etc.) incurred a 1 milliseconds overhead to ping the dongle, then that wouldn't translate to such a huge difference in performance. What do I know, I haven't decompiled the code. Wouldn't know without running performance tests on cracked and uncracked versions.

  5. #5

    Re: Since Steinberg has been hacked again ...

    Quote Originally Posted by kbaccki
    What do I know, I haven't decompiled the code. Wouldn't know without running performance tests on cracked and uncracked versions.
    That wouldn't do any good. We would have to be able to test between a copy protected version and a version that is coded straight without any copy protection. Most likely the emulation isn't as efficient as a protectionless version would be. It might even be less efficient than the dongle protected version. Only Steinberg knows the answer to this but they won't tell.

  6. #6

    Re: Since Steinberg has been hacked again ...

    What?!

    Are you saying that dongles affect the performance?

    I always thought they just had to be present for the program to run; it didn't occur to me that the program's code would be tied into the dongle.

    How weird.

  7. #7

    Re: Since Steinberg has been hacked again ...

    Legally - may you used a cracked version of a program you own?

  8. #8

    Re: Since Steinberg has been hacked again ...

    Quote Originally Posted by Nick Batzdorf
    What?!

    Are you saying that dongles affect the performance?
    The reason why it took that long for the dongle to be cracked is that the dongle isn't just a copy protection. It is part of the program itself. Therefore it can't just be disabled as the program wouldn't work after that. The crackers have to emulate the way the dongle works and it seemed to take a lot of hours to do just that. Sick, isn't it.

    As it has been discussed many times before on this forum and others, the paying customers are the ones that suffer from the copy protection schemes. Maybe this is the reason why it takes months for Steinberg to release updates to known issues. They are busy with implementing copy protections.

  9. #9

    Re: Since Steinberg has been hacked again ...

    At a meeting a Steinberg rep once mentioned that they were hoping for twelve months, so I guess they didn't quite make it. But then again, I guess ten months if they were hoping for twelve wasn't too bad.

    Guess it'll be time for SX4 soon then.

    Best protection is Sonar 4 if you're on a pc and don't like dongles.

  10. #10

    Re: Since Steinberg has been hacked again ...

    Quote Originally Posted by Seq
    Guess it'll be time for SX4 soon then.
    Perhaps the SX3.1 in August will be the first stable SX3 version. After that SX4 is out. That's the way it has been for years. The program gets barely usable before Steinberg releases a costly upgrade.

    Best protection is Sonar 4 if you're on a pc and don't like dongles.
    I don't like Sonar but Steinberg is doing their best on that one.

Go Back to forum
Page 1 of 19 123411 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •