The Rules Of The PSP Forums

[ooPo]

[EDIT: This is now out of date. See the real rules in the announcements forum.]

I suppose it is no secret - a few UMD games have been dumped and are no doubt floating around out there. Things are happening at a quicker pace and we may very well be seeing homebrew development become possible, legal or not, in the near future. However, this is not an excuse to go hog wild and forget there are many legal and moral issues surrounding us.

Here is what is currently off limits:

1) Asking or telling about where to obtain the dumps or the sdk.
2) Asking or ponderings on how to run a dumped game from a memorystick.
3) Study and disassembly of copyrighted code obtained illegally.
4) Sharing and discussion of information obtained illegally.
5) Development of methods to dump your own games.
6) Anything else that involves breaking the law for the majority of us here.
(this list will surely grow)

Here are some grey area things that may become off limits in the future:
1) Study and disassembly of data obtained from a dump of a game you do own.
2) Discussion of where and how you obtained a dump of a game you own for study.
(this list will surely change)

I would like to remind everyone that this is a forum dedicated to the study and development of new software in a manner as legally as possible. We've been less strict with this than we would have liked as there was really nothing much to do in pspdev at the time. Well, no longer...

1) Off-topic threads will be moved to off topic.
2) Threads that degenerate into an offtopic rambling will be split with the offending part moved to offtopic.
3) Threads that break the rules will be edited to remove the offending parts and locked.
4) Repeat offenders will be warned, then banned if they persist in breaking the rules.

We're not going to be draconian about it but it would be nice if everyone can at least try to stay on topic. There are plenty of other places you can chat about the latest gossip and I encourage you to do so there, not here.

Please feel free to discuss.

[mrbrown]

Great post, ooPo. I just want to emphasize the off limits points 3 & 4: please remember, if you have codewarrior or the sdk and are posting about it here, it's not legal even if you have legal access to both. Just stay away from it. Folks already have ways to run homebrew code on the PSP without access to restricted tools, so help with that effort. You'll also get the satisfaction of knowing the homebrew scene is 100% legal.

[Neila]

what is the policy of posting torrents?
how about just torrent-trackers?
....
links to pages that have links to torrent trackers?

[ooPo]

Obeying the spirit of the rules is generally a better idea than trying to bend them with technicalities and obfuscation.

[Neila]

sigh...

[lmx]

Running unnapproved program code on a closed system by means of reverse engineering hardware and software designed for protecting the closed system - ie. circumventing copy protection is illegal in some countries. Add that to the list?

By definition thats whats trying to be achieved here.

[Drakonite]

Running unnapproved program code on a closed system by means of reverse engineering hardware and software designed for protecting the closed system - ie. circumventing copy protection is illegal in some countries. Add that to the list?

By definition thats whats trying to be achieved here.

Most of those countries also have exceptions for interoporability.

[Krevnik]

Running unnapproved program code on a closed system by means of reverse engineering hardware and software designed for protecting the closed system - ie. circumventing copy protection is illegal in some countries. Add that to the list?

By definition thats whats trying to be achieved here.

Most of those countries also have exceptions for interoporability.

Including the US. In particular look at Real's Harmony project, it was an attempt to circumvent FairPlay in an attempt to be able to DRM their stuff, and have it work on the iPod through FairPlay. Apple had no legal recourse since it was reverse engineered for interoperability purposes, so Apple just changed how FairPlay worked just a little to lock them back out.

Just don't expect Sony to roll-over once someone figures out how to interact with the PSP, they will probably try to break it if it is feasible without breaking games on the market.

[ooPo]

If you're going to study the UMD dumps, it is required that you own the game you are studying. Also, do not just paste a bunch of dumped data into a thread and call it progress... a small snippet is probably fine, but you must include commentary on what you've learned from it or it must add to a conversation already in progress.

Basically, learn the difference between plagiarism and quoting and you'll be ok.

[Krevnik]

Good point ooPo... very good point. :)

[PspPet]

FYI: For USA applicable laws, here's one section that everyone should read and understand (IMHO):
http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/openlaw/DVD/1201.html
Especially section "(f) Reverse Engineering"

[ooPo]

There have been a few discussions lately involving UMD data obtained from dumps available at less reputable sites. As the rules state, you must own a copy of the game before you can study that data here on these forums.

However, some users have expressed unease at the practise as it is possibly illegal.

So, how do people feel about this? Should we ban talk of umd data outright? Should we just ban talk about how it was obtained? Should we not change anything at all?

There's going to be no right or wrong answer on this issue but it would be nice if we can address the concerns of most of the people here.

Please keep in mind that we are an international community and are subject to a wide and varied amount of laws. Your foolish DMCA means nothing in my country, for example. :)

[mrbrown]

I don't think we should facilitate or provide any code that facilitates dumping data off of UMDs. The only reason I haven't locked steddy's thread about reading from UMD is because there is nowhere near enough information in that thread to allow widespread UMD dumping. But thinking about it, shouldn't that thread be nipped in the bud?

Perhaps restricting posts that discuss information obtained from UMDs is going a bit too far. However we definitely don't want to know about where or how you obtained the UMD data.

So how about: don't post code to rip UMDs, and don't post details about how UMD data was obtained, whether or not you ripped it yourself.

[Guest]

I always liked to think of things a certain way:

Did we allow such talk / discussions in the days when the focus was the PS2 ?

Why would we change now ? Is it convenience, whether or not temporary ? Was it a desire all along, and the PSP provides an excuse ?

If there is a desire to change things now, shouldn't the change be applied across the board ?

Inconsistant approaches to these issues can be more damning then simply being consistantly lenient or strict, particularly with how the whole site is perceived, as opposed to specific individuals within the site.

[ooPo]

A big difference was that you could just drop your disc into a pc and read any data you wanted.

On the PSP, we can't do that... nor do we want to give out methods of dumping it. So, we're stuck between these two extremes.

[Guest]

So how about: don't post code to rip UMDs, and don't post details about how UMD data was obtained, whether or not you ripped it yourself.

Perhaps not a bad approach. There has to be a balance that doesn't restrict dev so as to make it impossible. The only thing I don't like is that this approach combines "hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil" that might also encourage *wink* *wink* dissembling.

And people WILL post asking WHERE to get these utilities, spawing periods of lock-a-thons.

Perhaps Oopo has the right way to think of it: its an optical media with data on it, some encrypted, some not. Data on it is fair game as it would be for DVDs and CDs - dump all you want and analyze unencrypted data.

Encrypted data, on the other hand, should it be treated differently ? Tools and methods for encrypted PS2 data are not discussed hardly at all. Its amazing how little discussion on those topics ever happens. So in this proposal, would that be a good practice to continue ?

In summary, allow discussion and tools for unencrypted data, but not encrypted data ?

So I throw out there this as one more suggestion for consideration.

[StrontiumDog]

In summary, allow discussion and tools for unencrypted data, but not encrypted data ?

Then how would you progress homebrew on any Version other than 1.0? (Apart from vain hopes about back door exploits that Sony wont plug 1ms after they are identified. If they even exist at all.)

Also, an SHA1 hash of a function name is a form of encrypting (SHA1 being a crytpographicly strong 1 way hash function), so that rule sort of messes with finding entry points in the libraries doesnt it?

I think discussing cryptography is legitimate, if a way is found to crack the Sony Private/Public key that would be an amazing feat, and would point out hither to unknown weaknesses is RSA. (Which is a good thing for the world, because if weaknesses exist in crypto algorithms they need to be identified, so better crypto algorithms can be developed from the wreckage of the compromised algorithm.) Maybe a massively parallel task to factor the public key (held somewhere in the PSP but yet to be identified) into its primes :)

I dont think the AES encryption rates as worthy of non-discussion, because it is fully symetric, so once you can recover the key, you can decrypt to your hearts content. And the PSP must have the key, either in the file or inside its memory, so its just a matter of time before its found. Unless of course it is RSA encrypted.

[Guest]

Stront, you really like to stir things up dont you ?

SHA1 is clearly being used as a hash, not encryption, as it was intended to be. That no longer needs discussion.

If the subject gets far enough to breaking AES and cryptos in general, then its no longer on topic, and I really don't have faith any of us will get anywhere. Steddy has come closest, I give him credit also for perserverance because nearly everyone is spinning their wheels on the crypto.

Anyone who thinks the key to 1.5 is breaking the crypto could spend their time better finding other ways in. There are actually people who believe the opening up of 1.0 stopped progress on 1.5; I believe its the people spending all their time on crypto on 1.5 holding up progress. With the exception of Steddy, I recommend people probe other ways. Of course people are free to do what they want. Browser hacking via buffer overflows is also a good move away from crypto... there could be a million buffer overflows available, probably the most promising way in, but people would rather search for crypto flaws ???

And you are missing the point of this thread. We are talking about reasonable limits for this site that are responsible with respect to general law and the gaming industry, and still balanced to allow reasonable dev.

If you plan to only come in playing devils advocate with an argument against any type of limit at all then you are not contributing to the discussion in any way.

For your next argument, I challenge you to present a reasonable limit and why you think it is so. Then we can discuss.

[StrontiumDog]

Stront, you really like to stir things up dont you ?

For your next argument, I challenge you to present a reasonable limit and why you think it is so. Then we can discuss.

ooPo pretty much nailed it in his original list (1-5).

Now you are going to get argument about whats legal etc (not just from me), but the list is good.

I think if you have an original UMD and you've dumped it yourself, you are free to use the data to reverse engineer and learn whatever you want. What real difference is there in doing it from your V1.0 PSP onto MStick, or sticking a PS2 DVD into a PC to read?

Bios Files, if you own a V1 PSP and you dumped your own Bios, hack away. Its not legitimate to use someone elses Bios dump.

Downloading a UMD image from a torrent or IRC, and hacking that. No i think thats off and shouldnt be condoned. Reason, its not your UMD that has been ripped, it could be different, it might be a JAP version or even (when things get more mature) a different version like a platinum version as opposed to an original. If you dont dump your own UMD then you cant know its the same as the UMD you own, and so i say (in countries that have copyright laws) this is off. And as this site is rightly targeted to the lowest common denominator with regard to IP laws, i think that discussing UMD dumps you didnt do yourself is bad.

Same goes for Bios Files. If you havent got a V1 PSP, and you havent dumped your own BIOS, you shouldnt be legitimately entitled to discuss results from Reverse Engineering those files on these forums. As you are in copyright breach.

Methods of dumping i dont think should be blocked, they are just memory readers after all. Also, if an exploit allows V1.5+ people to dump their UMD's i think this should be discussed and allowed, so more people can legitimately participate in the reverse engineering effort.

Which effectively means:
People with V1.0 PSP's (lucky sods) can do a lot.
Prople with V1.5+ PSP's are limited to analysing any update files they have recieved. And trying to find back door exploits. (At least without getting nasty with the hardware).

Encryption i think should be fair game, because the security of encryption does not lie with secrecy of the algorithm or the file format, but the keys. Its also something V1.5 PSP people can participate in. However people with V1.5 PSP's would be limited to what they can learn/speculate from the various update files, at least until someone discovers the public key. It may be a waste of time (probably is) but its still legitimate for people to discuss if they want to. If it doesnt interest you, you dont have to read the posts, or comment.

And before the toipic even starts, i think it is fair game to publish a public key, it is a "public" key after all.

So long story short i think the list should be expanded with:
6) Posting information derived from UMD Dumps, unless you both own the game and have duped the UMD yourself (currently limited to genuine owners of V1.0 Jap PSPs).
7) Posting information derived from Bios Dump results/analysis, unless you genuinely own a V1.0 Jap PSP and have dumped the Bios yourself.

I think 1) should be removed from the grey list.

Also, as well as a list of "donts" a list of "do's" would go some way to helping reduce the signal to noise ratio. (Yes i know im probably mostly in the noise category).

I was going to try and draft a DO list, but maybe im not the best person to do that :)

BTW when i say discuss, i mean "post new information derived from". I think anyone should be able to look at a post from a legitmate poster and provide their comments/insights, etc..

I also think hardware hacking should be allowed to be discussed. I could post volumes on homebrew BGA soldering techniques. Ive seen some very dodgy things done in industry (that work most of the time), so if someone has a brick why not impart a little knowledge that might let them reocover their PSP back to a working state? It would be possible to remove, and re-attach the bios chip for example without specialised tools. Most people will have them in their garage. Ive got an ERSA dark infra-red SMD rework station, but you dont need one of those, expecially if you are desperate.

I think modchips should be a grey issue and not an outright no-no. Just because someone can replace their BIOS doesnt mean they can pirate games, it should be in context. This goes with hardware hacking.

You did ask :)

[tomt]

i appreciate that you want to keep the activities on this board legal, but it seems the way it is applied is a bit random

tmbinc clearly stated he was using a rip of a game to find the wipeout browser buffer overflow, which were produced in the first place by people using an illegal copy of the sdk (paradox), but the thread wasnt closed.

but steddy's thread where he wants to know how to read data from a umd he owns was locked. considering there are already groups ripping these games (which incidentally no one knows how to play anyway) does it really make a difference?

[fashidus]

i appreciate the mods safety in protecting the board from any sort of action by sony...

but in the real world, telling someone how to do something is not illegal... doing it for them and providing the results is.

[PspPet]

> So how about: don't post code to rip UMDs, and don't post details about how UMD data was obtained, whether or not you ripped it yourself.

I disagree with being so restrictive.
As pointed out by many people, discussing general techniques is generally not illegal
The DMCA (restrictive as it is) doesn't disallow these kinds of discussions for legal reverse engineering. Why should this BBS be more restrictive ?

----
Point #1 / Commentary:
I believe this topic is still being discussed. I'd appreciate if moderators wouldn't act on their proposals *before* they have been fully discussed and the policy formally changed.

Point #2:
There is already code on this BBS for how to rip the contents of the FIRMWARE. Almost everything said about ripping data from the optical UMD drive applies to the code that rips from the Flash drive (ie. it can be used for illegal purposes too)
To be consistent would mean removing those posts as well [also way too extreme IMHO]

My suggestion/vote is to allow discussion of techniques. Sharing of copyrighted material remains a no-no of course.
No major change in policy (as stated in 'ooPo' initial post, leaving the grey areas grey - or at minimum adopt 'StrontiumDog's suggestions for legally obtaining information from your legally obtained games)

[ooPo]

i appreciate that you want to keep the activities on this board legal, but it seems the way it is applied is a bit random

When a large group of people with differing ideas get together it is hard to define an absolute set of rules. We try to do a best-effort approach and are generally open to reasonable and rational discussions on the subject. Also, as things progress some rules may be relaxed, like in the case of UMD dumps. We don't like that they're out there, but we can't do much about it now except avoid telling people how to get them.

The point is, we're trying. :)

I disagree with being so restrictive.
As pointed out by many people, discussing general techniques is generally not illegal
The DMCA (restrictive as it is) doesn't disallow these kinds of discussions for legal reverse engineering. Why should this BBS be more restrictive ?

Legal it may be, its not very nice to help facilitate piracy. Aside from study of executables on the UMD, there is little reason from a homebrew standpoint to be able to dump entire discs. It also isn't a very complex thing to figure out. Think of it like a hurdle to prove you're interested in development. This will probably be relaxed after information will most likely be posted elsewhere in the future... we'd just rather not be the first site a warez0r visits to get his latest toolbuilding information.

Point #1 / Commentary:
I believe this topic is still being discussed. I'd appreciate if moderators wouldn't act on their proposals *before* they have been fully discussed and the policy formally changed.

I agree, sometimes we can be a little premature in our moderation of topics that have yet to be decided upon. However, making a rule after the information has been presented is rather useless. The only consolation I can really provide is that we rarely ban people. At worst the information will be edited out and a (usually) polite response asking you to stop while we figure out how it best fits into these forums.

[Drakonite]

Point #1 / Commentary:
I believe this topic is still being discussed. I'd appreciate if moderators wouldn't act on their proposals *before* they have been fully discussed and the policy formally changed.

The PS2DEV moderators discuss issues and rules far more than you think, however the majority of the discussions do not happen on the forums.

I know the rules seem a bit arbitrary at times, but I assure you they aren't nearly as arbitrary as they seem.

[Marco_N]

Here's how I see the UMD dumper problem:

1. there is no denying that UMD dumpers do exist and at least 2 parties have them;
2. it is unquestionably illegal to obtain/use the fruits of said parties labour (at least in some countries);
3. point 2 nonwithstanding, a lot of people want to have a closer look at the software they bought and many have the right to do so;
4. the only way they can do that, ATAPI-UMD drives being unavailable, is to use their PSP to copy the UMD do a medium they can use - this being a legitimate copy since no copy protection is being circumvented (at least not currently that I'm aware of - there may perhaps be some form SecuROM for UMD in the future which would make things different!)
5. Based on the above, I think the discussion of a UMD dumper should be allowed; yes, it could be used for illegal porposes but that genie is out of the box already! It's the legitimate users that cannot make their own UMD dump for their own research/use only that is at stake here. Without UMD dumpers there can't be any serious reverse engineering, the result of which is of course getting homebrew to work on any PSP. The discussion of say less honourable intentions can be dealt with as such, but that has nothing to do with the actual dumping itself.

PS By UMD dumper I mean a simple program for the PSP that does nothing more than read sectors off a UMD and writing them 1:1 to a file(s) on the MemoryStick, i.e. without any "analysis" being done to avoid any DMCA violations.

[mrbrown]

I wrote a "UMD dumper" without the need to discuss it on the forums. Others can do the same. If they do need to discuss details of one, they don't have to do it here.

[PspPet]

The issue is not whether the task of reading UMD data is easy or not. The purpose of a BBS is to share information. Everyone can reinvent the wheel. Using censorship to hide an obvious solution as a newbie admission test is misdirected effort IMHO. If so obvious, it certainly isn't going to stop a WAREZ cracker.

It is a small point, but censorship starts with the little things (NOTE: when discussing "arbitrary" censorship, look it from the people being censored, not the people *doing* the censorship. People doing the censorship rarely see their actions as arbitrary ;-)

----
Moderators: Can we please get an official policy decision on this topic ? soon ?
Leaving this issue open (while censorship is happenning) is lame IMHO

If there is a topic that most people consider legal (based on my reading of the replies above) but the moderators consider too-hot-to-handle - the rules should be clearly and officially defined.
[my apologies if I am lumping all the moderators together]

To repeat - I consider this a very draconian *proposed* policy, and if adopted would be a setback from the perspective of freedom-of-speech. However the board rules are setup by the moderators. If they wish to be more restrictive than the restrictive DMCA, that is their choice -- they have the ultimate power

[pixel]

Moderators: Can we please get an official policy decision on this topic ? soon ?
Leaving this issue open (while censorship is happenning) is lame IMHO

The decision is already taken. mrbrown is part of the moderators team, and I fully agree with him on that point. And all the other moderators (read ooPo, oobles, Drakonite, gorim, blackdroid, me, and maybe a few others I am forgetting) do agree as well. Period.

[ooPo]

Rules updated. Changes are in bold.

PspPet:

Please keep in mind that the purpose of these forums is to share homebrew information in a legal and moral manner. Information on dumping data from a UMD is of little use to homebrew outside of studying the executables. If you have the skills to study those executables effectively, then figuring out how to dump it yourself is a cakewalk. You're also able to find this data elsewhere...

...but by not posting how to do it here we're stopping the vast VAST majority of people from dumping their own games for distribution. This is a moral decision - we'd be well in our legal rights to tell everyone how to do it, or even give them a program to do it. We choose not to.

I'm sorry if it still seems arbitrary to you. I invite you to ask for further clarification until it does make sense to you. You're also free to further try to convince us that this is a bad idea - who knows? This issue will also no doubt be revisited when/if a dumping tool is released by a warez group. The information is currently obscure - we just choose to help it remain that way.

Still, the official rule is in place now. I've moved it from the grey area to off-limits. I'm sorry it took this long but I did want to hear what people had to say about it.

[PspPet]

I disagree with the conclusion - but I thank you for the clarification.

> You're also free to further try to convince us that this is a bad idea...
My best argument has been made and apparently ignored (censoring on-topic otherwise legal free-speech -- under terms more restrictive than the DMCA).
I suspect the decision will be reversed in the future