“Discouraging Software Piracy Using Software Aging”

“Discouraging Software Piracy Using Software Aging” Markus Jakobsson & Michael Reiter “According to a recent study, the computer industry loses $11 billion annually to piracy…”

Outline • What constitutes piracy? • Piracy and Ethics • The prevention by “Software Aging” proposition • Issues

Assumptions • There is only one distributor • Is this really a practical model? • Illegitimate users do not collude • In reality, they do • Only pirates who operate for profit are considered

Participants

Piracy and Pfleeger’s Taxonomy • Where does it fit in? • Interruption? – No • Interception? – Sort of: unauthorised parties gain possession of software • Modification? – Yes: some sort of “crack” is usually necessary to circumvent standard anti-copying measures • Fabrication? – Possibly: a fabricated licence management module is sometimes added to software to force it to run

Piracy and “Universal” Ethics • Right to knowledge – some would argue that software is knowledge and should be owned by all… therefore piracy is not wrong • Right to privacy – is applicable to this particular prevention system… more later • Right to fair compensation – if it is fair that anyone who uses a piece of software should have given the author financial compensation… • Is there an alternative form of compensation?

Approach • Try to tie the process of software updates (bug-fixes, enhancements etc) to a piracy prevention system • Minimize negative impact on legitimate users • Maximize cost for pirates • Force continuous software updates – attempt to force pirate to be responsible for providing these

Update Protocol • Each piece of software carries a unique identifier (serial number) • The distributor may notify the software/user that an update is required • The software initiates a request for the update, sending the identifier, communication is “online” – modem or Internet

Forcing Updates • The program version of files output by the software is included in the file • The output files are encrypted via a symmetric key, e.g. DES • The key only works for one file/software version

Compatibility

Sound Familiar? • Antivirus software that limits the number of updates before payment is required (e.g. Norton AV) – natural model • Microsoft Office :o) ?

Do We Really Want This? • What are some problems with an encrypted file format? • Makes integration difficult – if we wish to import the file into another program to manipulate it • The file is not “human readable”, the computing community as a whole is moving towards open standards, e.g. XML • Error recovery – if your XML file gets corrupted and confuses its application, you can always fix it with notepad

Accessibility and Privacy • Not everyone has an Internet connection • Not everyone has a modem • We are allowing a connection to our machine from a remote site • Are we just transmitting what we think we are?

Conclusion • The paper proposes forcing users to update regularly by making all files output by a piece of software encrypted, and changing the encryption key with every upgrade • Backwards compatibility is maintained • If continuous updates to a given piece of software are required, this system could work, but there are issues…

Conclusion • Updates must be essential • Users must have “online” access • Integration is difficult (impossible?) with encrypted files • A new cost model is introduced • Finally and most importantly…

Conclusion • Would you buy software that utilises this system?

“Discouraging Software Piracy Using Software Aging”