Ilok busted?

[robotmonkey]

This is a never ending story Ilok 3 will be pirated too.pirate take less time to pirate ilok 2 than ilok 1 . I think the better way for the dev to keep control of their plugin would be monthly / weekly activation , this way they could just desactivate the pirated serial...

This would never work as it would justify even more using pirated plugins. If a plugin would need to be reactivated every month I would either avoid buying such a plugin or it would get replaced with a patched version ASAP. Something similar happened with Korg Legacy which has some kind of activation bug that result exactly kind of similar behavior. Soon enough I got so sick and tired of it that I had to take countermeasures.

Annoying your customers with CP is not a way to go!

[robotmonkey]

Cracked software comes with a price: all kinds of stability issues that can make your system practically unusable. Why would someone who wants to make music want an instable workstation?

Sadly this a common misconception. Sometimes indeed it might influence stability but often it's the other way around - getting rid of the copy protection actually increases stability and performance. Also the more professional releases often even fix some bugs developers have ignored. So it's kind of double slap in the face for people who are using a legitimate version. Truth is that often cracked plugins offer much better and trouble free experience than their legitimate counterparts.

[Obsolete236871]

... getting rid of the copy protection actually increases stability and performance.

I highly doubt the accuracy of this statement, if you are trying to say that hacked / cracked software is more stable than legit software!

[scintillator]

... getting rid of the copy protection actually increases stability and performance.

I highly doubt the accuracy of this statement.

Doubting on an issue that can be proved, and HAS been proved is... well, you get it.

BTW my dog thinks developers should sue PACE's ass off, I see this has not been discussed so far, what do you guys think?

[Sampleconstruct]

... getting rid of the copy protection actually increases stability and performance.

I highly doubt the accuracy of this statement.

Doubting on an issue that can be proved, and HAS been proved is... well, you get it.

BTW my dog thinks developers should sue PACE's ass off, I see this has not been discussed so far, what do you guys think?

You should consider a different copy protection for your dog.

[bronxsound]

the management should sack engineer/engineers behind ilok2 and employ those who broke the protection.

[Obsolete236871]

@scintillator + @ robotmonkey

Maybe there is a miscomprehension on your side:

Yes, software without any copy protection vs software with copy protection - probably the software without will win stability / reliability wise, since copy protection adds another complex layer of code - often involving the registry of the OS and so on. Professional copy protection such as Ilok / elicenser will however most likely not mess with your system in any negative way.

But I was talking about pirated / hacked / cracked versions of software that actually has copy protection. The original version of such software without any hacking into the copy protection will be far more stable, than the hacked version that can actually totally f**k up your system, since the hacking into the copy protection can involve essential parts of the OS like the registry. Illegit software thats based on a hacked copy protection is one of the safest ways to mess up your OS. It's almost like downloading Malware consciously.

[scintillator]

... getting rid of the copy protection actually increases stability and performance.

I highly doubt the accuracy of this statement.

Doubting on an issue that can be proved, and HAS been proved is... well, you get it.

BTW my dog thinks developers should sue PACE's ass off, I see this has not been discussed so far, what do you guys think?

You should consider a different copy protection for your dog.

Very insightful, thanks for sharing.

[scintillator]

But I was talking about pirated / hacked / cracked versions of software that actually has copy protection. The original version of such software without any hacking into the copy protection will be far more stable, than the hacked version that can actually totally f**k up your system, since the hacking into the copy protection can involve essential parts of the OS like the registry. Illegit software thats based on a hacked copy protection is one of the safest ways to mess up your OS. It's almost like downloading Malware consciously.

You obviously don't know what you're talking about.

[robotmonkey]

why does everyone here and in the same GS related topic, automatically presume that these all function correctly and will still be doing so in say 2 weeks? Thankfully in any case it's win versions only, they will quickly update the protection, so there will be a 4 year cycle again (hopefully) at least.

An update can not uncrack the plugins released which seem to be pretty much all the latest versions of most high profile plugins.

On Mac the iLok was already circumvented earlier this year, by the way.

Also it's not yet clear how the plugins were cracked. Were the Pace protection reverse engineered and or brute forced, or did someone get into their network and stole some inside info? If, how and when Pace can recover depends on a lot of things and it might turn out that it's not just as easy as pushing out an update.

[scintillator]

My money is on reverse engineered.

[robotmonkey]

Let's see how this develops in the next weeks first before prophesying doom and destruction, it was bound to happen and methods will be found to mitigate the effects.

I'm sure it's not all doom and destruction as there certainly are some shy smiles of restrained joy on the faces of people at Avid's offices when they realize that after several years of going downhill there might be an increase of the ProTool's user base.

[Obsolete236871]

But I was talking about pirated / hacked / cracked versions of software that actually has copy protection. The original version of such software without any hacking into the copy protection will be far more stable, than the hacked version that can actually totally f**k up your system, since the hacking into the copy protection can involve essential parts of the OS like the registry. Illegit software thats based on a hacked copy protection is one of the safest ways to mess up your OS. It's almost like downloading Malware consciously.

You obviously don't know what you're talking about.

What gives you this impression? Please elaborate!

Do you think that a crack / hack doesn't alter the orginal code and the way a software corresponds with the OS? Then it's obviously you who doesn't know the first things about computer science!

Also: are you suggesting that you possess inside knowledge on the process of cracking software?

[trimph1]

the management should sack engineer/engineers behind ilok2 and employ those who broke the protection.

That might just work.

[trimph1]

But I was talking about pirated / hacked / cracked versions of software that actually has copy protection. The original version of such software without any hacking into the copy protection will be far more stable, than the hacked version that can actually totally f**k up your system, since the hacking into the copy protection can involve essential parts of the OS like the registry. Illegit software thats based on a hacked copy protection is one of the safest ways to mess up your OS. It's almost like downloading Malware consciously.

You obviously don't know what you're talking about.

What gives you this impression? Please elaborate!

Do you think that a crack / hack doesn't alter the orginal code and the way a software corresponds with the OS? Then it's obviously you who doesn't know the first things about computer science!

Also: are you suggesting that you possess inside knowledge on the process of cracking software?