From CNN (http://edition.cnn.com/2003/TECH/internet/08/28/downloading.music.ap/) -
"[T]he industry disclosed its use of a library of digital fingerprints, called "hashes," that it said can uniquely identify MP3 music files that had been traded on the Napster service as far back as May 2000."
Obviously I'm new here, and this question might be dumb, I don't know, but: Can anyone explain what this means?
Full Version: How RIAA tracks downloaders
It means the RIAA has an archive of MD5 (or SFV/some other checksum...) values for a few million MP3s. Effectively, that means that if you download a copy of a song that is bit-for-bit identical with one they've catalogued, they might be aware of that file... but it does not mean they know you downloaded it, unless they are also using packet sniffers like wiretaps.
Also, if you have a copy of the same song which was ripped from a different source, or the same source but with a different sample offset, the "hash" will be completely different from the one they've catalogued. So for any given song, there are any number of possible encodes of that song, and thus any number of possible hashes (limited only by the number of bytes in whatever hashing algorithm they've chosen).
- M.
Also, if you have a copy of the same song which was ripped from a different source, or the same source but with a different sample offset, the "hash" will be completely different from the one they've catalogued. So for any given song, there are any number of possible encodes of that song, and thus any number of possible hashes (limited only by the number of bytes in whatever hashing algorithm they've chosen).
- M.
Amazing. Truely Wonderful. I have to admit, they are technological pioneers. Checksums are truely advanced new technology.
QUOTE(smith454 @ Aug 31 2003, 05:27 PM)
"[T]he industry disclosed its use of a library of digital fingerprints, called "hashes," that it said can uniquely identify MP3 music files that had been traded on the Napster service as far back as May 2000."
Snapshot taken at the interview:
edit: link corrected.
hashes are useless.
If I used MP3Gain on the files, the hash wouldn't match, would it?
If I used MP3Gain on the files, the hash wouldn't match, would it?
QUOTE(/\/ephaestous @ Sep 1 2003, 04:01 AM)
hashes are useless.
If I used MP3Gain on the files, the hash wouldn't match, would it?
If I used MP3Gain on the files, the hash wouldn't match, would it?
No it wouldn't.
Even if you added/modified tags it wouldn't.
@Valefor: Checksums are not new. They have been used to verify downloads for ages and sharing programs like eMule/edonkey identifies files by checksum.
QUOTE(Jan S. @ Sep 1 2003, 03:08 AM)
@Valefor: Checksums are not new. They have been used to verify downloads for ages and sharing programs like eMule/edonkey identifies files by checksum.
I'm pretty sure he was kidding. His post (IMO) seems to reek of sarcasm.
(Though I could be wrong.)@LIF: That's an appropriate pic. But I'll die before it's me.
Kinda cool that something as simple as MP3Gain would shut down one the RIAA's means of stealing from us.
Forward The Revolution! Stop music theft by the RIAA. They giveth and they taketh away? Not on my watch!
I payeth, they giveth, transaction ends.
IMHO, As always, the R*AA is trying to scare more people, by using nested technical statements.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.