quote:

---

PS3 hacker gets restraining order
MCV - 28th January 2011

»www.mcvuk.com/news/42765/PS3-hac···ng-order

George ‘geohot’ Hotz has been issued a temporary restraining order preventing him from distributing PS3 homebrew software.

The judge granted Sony its request for the order which was submitted earlier this month.

Court documents published by PSX Scene read: “The court finds that SCEA has shown a likelihood of success on the merits of its claims for violation of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act and Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, and that it will suffer irreparable harm unless defendant Hotz’s violations are enjoined.

“The court also finds that a temporary restraining order and order of impoundment are necessary to prevent immediate and irreparable injury to SCEA, before the hearing on the order regarding the preliminary injunction can take pace, and to preserve the status quo.”

The news comes as Sony issues firmware update 3.56 over PSN which includes a new PS3 security update. However, this has already been hacked. [see next article in this reply - SB]

---

quote:

---

PS3 security update already hacked
MCV - 28th January 2011

»www.mcvuk.com/news/42770/PS3-sec···y-hacked

Sony’s latest PS3 firmware update has already been overcome by hackers just hours after going live.

As mentioned in the news story about Sony winning a restraining order against George Hotz, the platform holder launched firmware update 3.56 on PSN last night. The patch adds a new security update.

However Edge is reporting that Wii hacker Youness Alaoui claims to have already bypassed the new PS3 update in order to upload homebrew software. He published the details on his Twitter page.

---

And why I haven't bought anything produced by Sony since the rootkit scandal...

quote:

---

And this really is the crux of the whole DRM and TPM stuff. TPM itself has a couple of advantages, but its potential abuses far outweigh the advantages.

---

Well unfortunately gaming consoles for now have to be locked down in regards to the online community. How much is it going to suck that some one is racing around in a 1000hp Daihautsui Midget in GT5 or enable god mode or flying in a first person shooter? I remember having to leave rooms in Socom 2 just because someone was bored and decided to ruin a few games.

example?

If I want to buy a PS3 and use it as a doorstop, I can do that. Right?

While I agree with what most of you are saying, this is going to suck for the online gaming community... :(.

quote:

---

Simply put, Sony claims that it's illegal for users to access their own computers in a way that Sony doesn't like.

---

I've had PS3's for years, and there used to be an option to install another OS on them. I don't know if Sony removed that option. To the best of my recollection the openness of the Sony PS3 was a feature that was at least mentioned at the time. There were some articles about people who used Linux with PS3's to work on some scientific problems. Sony seemed to encourage that at the time.

Did Sony remove the install Linux feature on all PS3's? Including PS3's that initially had that feature?

And why I haven't bought anything produced by Sony since the rootkit scandal...

And why I haven't bought anything produced by Sony since the rootkit scandal...

quote:

---

For years, EFF has been warning that the anti-circumvention provisions of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act can be used to chill speech, particularly security research, because legitimate researchers will be afraid to publish their results lest they be accused of circumventing a technological protection measure. We've also been concerned that the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act could be abused to try to make alleged contract violations into crimes.

We've never been sorrier to be right. These two things are precisely what's happening in Sony v. Hotz. If you have missed this one, Sony has sued several security researchers for publishing information about security holes in Sony’s PlayStation 3. At first glance, it's hard to see why Sony is bothering — after all, the research was presented three weeks ago at the Chaos Communication Congress and promptly circulated around the world. The security flaws discovered by the researchers allow users to run Linux on their machines again — something Sony used to support but recently started trying to prevent. Paying lawyers to try to put the cat back in the bag is just throwing good money after bad. And even if they won — we'll save the legal analysis for another post — the defendants seem unlikely to be able to pay significant damages. So what's the point?

The real point, it appears, is to send a message to security researchers around the world: publish the details of our security flaws and we'll come after you with both barrels blazing. For example, Sony has asked the court to immediately impound all "circumvention devices" — which it defines to include not only the defendants' computers, but also all "instructions," i.e., their research and findings. Given that the research results Sony presumably cares about are available online, granting the order would mean that everyone except the researchers themselves would have access to their work.

Not content with the DMCA hammer, Sony is also bringing a slew of outrageous Computer Fraud and Abuse Act claims. The basic gist of Sony's argument is that the researchers accessed their own PlayStation 3 consoles in a way that violated the agreement that Sony imposes on users of its network (and supposedly enabled others to do the same). But the researchers don't seem to have used Sony's network in their research — they just used the consoles they bought with their own money. Simply put, Sony claims that it's illegal for users to access their own computers in a way that Sony doesn't like. Moreover, because the CFAA has criminal as well as civil penalties, Sony is actually saying that it's a crime for users to access their own computers in a way that Sony doesn't like.

That means Sony is sending another dangerous message: that it has rights in the computer it sells you even after you buy it, and therefore can decide whether your tinkering with that computer is legal or not. We disagree. Once you buy a computer, it's yours. It shouldn't be a crime for you to access your own computer, regardless of whether Sony or any other company likes what you're doing.

---