KVR Audio

jmh · Post by **jmh** » Sat Oct 16, 2004 2:36 pm

DevonB I thought I explained things in regard to 2016 but here we go once again.

2016 uses a different level of PACE for protection, doesn't utilize the notorious iLok driver in any form or shape.

As I said earlier, you were talking about a different thing - I / we are talking about 2016 and its use of PACE. I'm very familiar with the iLok thing myself, made the mistake of trying out products that put that piece of s**t on my machine and experienced the same things... It's just that now things are different

PACE being 100% same as iLok, I'm afraid it's just not as simple as that. A quick glance at PACE website reveals what I've said here, there's different levels of protection and not all involve the dreaded iLok driver...

I hope it's all clear now

Regards,

JMH

multree · Post by **multree** » Sat Oct 16, 2004 2:42 pm

okay to get back on topic.....

it's so nice to finally be able to use a reverb at 100% mix settings.

this piece just kicks some serious behind.

DevonB · Post by **DevonB** » Sat Oct 16, 2004 2:51 pm

jmh wrote:PACE being 100% same as iLok, I'm afraid it's just not as simple as that. A quick glance at PACE website reveals what I've said here, there's different levels of protection and not all involve the dreaded iLok driver...

I hope it's all clear now

Regards,

JMH

Let's go take a look, shall we?

SERIAL NUMBER AUTHORIZATIONS

Serial number authorization is the "lightweight" form of InterLok use. As the name implies, serial number authorization sends an encrypted serial number to the remote application locked with InterLok. Once serialized, an application is unlocked and may easily be copied by your customers from machine to machine. The first time a locked application is run on a new computer, it will request the user enter the serial number authorization you have provided. In this way, a program and its serial number authorization must travel together when being moved from machine to machine.

From here -

http://www.paceap.com/technical.html

Pace *IS* InterLok. Whether it uses the pktd.sys??? (I can't remember the exact name of the driver) is a different story. I'm now starting to assume looking at their tiered schemes that we have serial number uses no driver while challenge/response does use a driver? Haven't installed 2016 to find out either. Wish I could remember the exact 4 letter name of the .sys driver.

Do you know what it's called?

Devon

DevonB · Post by **DevonB** » Sat Oct 16, 2004 2:53 pm

Oh, and please don't be offended, I just like to VERIFY everything with my own eyes, that's all. Like they say "trust.... but verify."

Devon

jmh · Post by **jmh** » Sat Oct 16, 2004 3:14 pm

Devon

I don't feel offended in any way, that's a sign of a good conversation taking place.

So, for further clarification... there's three terms, PACE, InterLok and iLok. At some points we've propably gotten the terms mixed... I did speak about iLok, referring to the dongle and its driver (whose name escapes me, guess that's just healthy, to forget bad things

).

Hence I said "PACE being 100% same as iLok, I'm afraid it's just not as simple as that". InterLok is their protection system, PACE AP is the company and iLok is the dongle. I have to admit, I'm still getting InterLok and iLok confused myself, even though I appear as the smartypants knowing things better

Their serial and challenge/response systems, neither necessarily uses the dongle. 2016 being one of these products, it utilizes a rather basic c/r thing using a long series of numbers (as opposed to that 'list of words' method they are talking about on their site).

InterLok authorizations are revolutionary in that they are sent and received as a series of short English words (i.e. MARS CAT BOAT RUN KING)

... on my machine, the challenge is

8239 2447 3221 5872 3579 3748 8835 3031 3031 9498 7854 0754 1245 7922 9699 1092 6327 6528 9108

which according to my limited understanding isn't english...

Regarding the registration, there's the internet activation (not familiar with this but I assume it contacts the manufacturer's server and gets a response automagically) and the manual activation where you input the response by hand...

All in all, looks like a pretty sensible form of protection. A pinch of salt with this one though, based on our earlier experiences something might easily go wrong when it comes to PACE

Regards,

JMH

munchkin · Post by **munchkin** » Sat Oct 16, 2004 3:18 pm

When I installed it and ran the Cakewalk VST adapter a demo/register screen came up. I clicked demo then the adapter froze. I re-ran it and everything seemed fine but the reverb wouldn't show in Sonar 4's list of fx.

It caused Live 4 to crash the first time I opened it. Ableton Live 4 won't load it now. Nor will EnergyXT. They just freeze.

In conclusion there is something dodgy about this software on my system. Believe me when I say that I have software with a variety of c/p systems and none of them produce this nonsense. It's a shame because I'd've liked to try the demo.

whyterabbyt · Post by **whyterabbyt** » Sat Oct 16, 2004 3:18 pm

jmh quoth 2016 uses a different level of PACE for protection, doesn't utilize the notorious iLok driver in any form or shape.

Lets just correct one thing here.

The iLok is PACE's USB-dongle based protection system

The 'notorious' PACE protection system, which causes/caused so many problems with software, was not iLok based. It used, as Devon nearly got, a driver called tpkd.sys.

If this software does not use a dongle, then it uses a pure software based copy protection system, and PACE's known software based copy protection system was based on the tpkd.sys, and it, not iLok, is the 'infamous' one.

So please, check your facts before telling people not to be

so melodramatic, dare I even say stupid

because its quite clear you dont actually have a full understanding of the facts regarding PACE's various software protection systems, and their history.

mauseoleum · Post by **mauseoleum** » Sat Oct 16, 2004 3:21 pm

come on.

i've posted the very regkey our lovely roomplug wrote to registry on my comp. it contains both words 'PACE' and 'InterLok'.

iLok - shorthand or Mac version (like iMac, iFart or similar)?

go figure, you are the wisest of all sages

whyterabbyt · Post by **whyterabbyt** » Sat Oct 16, 2004 3:29 pm

mausoleum quoth
i've posted the very regkey our lovely roomplug wrote to registry on my comp. it contains both words 'PACE' and 'InterLok'.

iLok - shorthand or Mac version

please do some checking on PACE's website before deciding what is 'short' for someting else.

InterLok 4.1 is the next-generation tool set for distributing and selling software in a flexible, cost-effective, and highly secure manner.

and

New Features and Benefits
.
.
.

• New iLok support features: Support for specifying license expiration periods and demo launch counts in PACE's iLok USB Smart Key. Support and specification for Internet Activation and iLok management through PACE Web Services.
.

InterLok supports the iLok. InterLok is not iLok.

Is basic research beyond you people? Use google, get the facts, then make statements. Dont just pull them out your ass.

jmh · Post by **jmh** » Sat Oct 16, 2004 3:30 pm

Whyterabbyt to the rescue

I stand corrected in that matter. In my memory iLok and the previous form of protection get mixed up - after all, for my the problems with the notorius driver were a long time ago.

As for the rest, quite Whyterabbytian bit slightly off. Or did you not read the other posts?

Your selective quoting which doesn't even take the rest of the thread into consideration... typical of you, might I say. Especially the last bit. Do us all a favor and enlighten us if you have more insight into things - I was asked to do that and I complied. Somehow you just ignored all that

I didn't at any point claim to have full understanding of things, so I'm anxiously awaiting for you to reveal something missed so far

Furthermore I apologized twice, yet another thing that failed to get through... sigh. Well, I've been waiting to get into your claws for a long time, I just hoped it was something bigger than this

I'm not claiming to be an authority in this matter, if that makes you feel happy. I'm explaining things I'm looking into, and there can surely be room for improvement and an occasional mistake.

tpkd.sys that was it. But that one isn't used now... as explained already. Any more questions?

* edited out a part that referred to something Whyterabbyt just explained so eloquently to Mausoleum

*

Go ahead Whyterabbyt, put some effort to it

Regards,

JMH

mauseoleum · Post by **mauseoleum** » Sat Oct 16, 2004 3:36 pm

sorry, wabbit, but you DID notice the razz icon?

admitedly o.t. amongst such serious matters, but, i simply couldn't help it. it *happened*.

jmh · Post by **jmh** » Sat Oct 16, 2004 3:53 pm

Apparently 2016 has already been "warezed", according to comments seen on irc.

As likely as it was to happen... there goes the chances of seeing the other algorithms released as VST. Crap.

So much for PACE and their ads though

Regards,

JMH

whyterabbyt · Post by **whyterabbyt** » Sat Oct 16, 2004 4:01 pm

jmh Whyterabbyt to the rescue

If providing a correction of claimed facts is a 'rescue' then yes.

I stand corrected in that matter. In my memory iLok and the previous form of protection get mixed up - after all, for my the problems with the notorius driver were a long time ago.

Checking wouldnt have been hard, particularly considering the tone of your first post. You know, the 'snickering' bit.

As for the rest, quite Whyterabbytian bit slightly off. Or did you not read the other posts?

You want me to go through them all, conflate them and then address the amalgamated end-product?

Sorry, I dont do that.

I saw you post something innacurate, which hadn't been corrected. So I addressed that innacuracy. For some reason you have a problem with that?

Your selective quoting which doesn't even take the rest of the thread into consideration...

I addressed the innacuracy, not the 'rest of the thread'. Do you address every single part of a thread when you respond to someone? I doubt it.

typical of you, might I say.

Im sure its easier for you to think that way...

Especially the last bit.

Which last bit. Be precise please.

Do us all a favor and enlighten us if you have more insight into things

I will, thank you.

I was asked to do that and I complied.

Congratulations.

Somehow you just ignored all that I didn't at any point claim to have full understanding of things,

But you did feel the need to tell everyone else they were reacting 'stupidly' without that 'full udnerstanding'. Hmmmm.

so I'm anxiously awaiting for you to reveal something missed so far

How sweet.

Furthermore I apologized twice, yet another thing that failed to get through... sigh.

You may have apologised, but did you provide the corrected facts?

You finally did at 15.14 (my time) in comparison to my post dated 15.18, but at that point in time I had already started my post.

So unless you expect someone to refresh a thread continously whilst responding to someone just in case they change their mind, my post still had a purpose.

The fact that you dont seem to like being corrected is irrelevant to that purpose.

Well, I've been waiting to get into your claws for a long time, I just hoped it was something bigger than this

I see. So this is less about being corrected and more about you wanting to prove some sort of 'fastest gun' thing?

I'm not claiming to be an authority in this matter, if that makes you feel happy. I'm explaining things I'm looking into, and there can surely be room for improvement and an occasional mistake.

Yes there can. Without any 'waiting for you' nonsense.

tpkd.sys that was it. But that one isn't used now... as explained already.

Even if it is no longer part of the currently-shipped InterLok system, that isnt any guarantee that people are using the current version of that system in their software. Go pick up a copy of OB-Tune, see if you get tpkd.sys...

Any more questions?

Are we having fun yet?

Go ahead Whyterabbyt, put some effort to it

No effort required, cowboy. Dont shoot yourself in the foot trying to be too smug.

whyterabbyt · Post by **whyterabbyt** » Sat Oct 16, 2004 4:04 pm

mauseoleum quothsorry, wabbit, but you DID notice the razz icon?

Good point, my apologies.

VitaminD · Post by **VitaminD** » Sat Oct 16, 2004 4:10 pm

a think a timeout is needed...

anyways.. the only problem I have with this dll plugin is the fact that it writes stuff to my registry, yet there is no uninstall program to remove it. So I'll have to go roaming through my registry and hope I remove all of the associated keys and entries.. manually.

I think its just that one folder in reg, but even so it should have had an uninstaller that would remove the appropriate reg keys.. or at the very very least could have put what to remove and stepbystep how in the pdf that came with it.

Princeton Digital - REVERB