View Profile
View Forum Posts
For an unlimited time only, I am giving my solution away for free.
+ Reply to Thread
Results 121 to 150 of 204
-
-
You can't DO that! It'll undercut the price of my re-branded version of your solution. Why do you hate capitalism?Originally Posted by gonca
-
Don't worry, there's one born every minute.You can't DO that! It'll undercut the price of my re-branded version of your solution. Why do you hate capitalism?
-
Okay fine. But I'm taking your name off the credits for spite.Originally Posted by gonca
-
Can't win them all, but the CIA will be knocking on your door.
This kinda of reminds me of gamemaniaco. -
That's definitely crossed my mind. But props -- you said it first.Originally Posted by gonca
-
You LIE! And you made a distorted picture to support your lie. I listened to the clip between 2:32 to 2:35 repeatedly and could not hear anything unusual on the beats. And I took the snapshot which shows any shift is much less than your exaggerated version, not to mention that the shift is the result of your filtering:Originally Posted by jagabo
I used that particular segment because the problem is easily seen in the waveform and heard in the audio. But the problem occurs throughout and is often audible.Originally Posted by Cienoway
I had originally intended to include the time stamps in the image but cropped them out by accident. It runs from about 2:31.80 to 2:35.20. Remember, I bandpass filtered and amplified the section to highlight the drum beats in the image.Originally Posted by Cienoway
Here is yours which exaggerated things:
[Attachment 25609 - Click to enlarge]
Notice that the drum beat is at a pace of 0.5 seconds per beat. That's very slow drum beat. Knowing what I do, there is no artifact to show when the beat pace is as slow as 0.5 seconds per beat. There's much faster paced machine gun shots else where in the clip and they sound perfectly normal. -
No, I masked out the other sounds to make the drum beats more visible. You didn't.Originally Posted by Cienoway
It's obvious to me.Originally Posted by Cienoway
-
Of course it is obvious when you scrutinize it using a waveform analyzer. To an average audience listening while watching the movie, there is nothing unusual there:Originally Posted by jagabo
No, I masked out the other sounds to make the drum beats more visible. You didn't.Originally Posted by Cienoway
It's obvious to me.Originally Posted by Cienoway
Sample: http://www.firedrive.com/file/1B293008C53FD6EE
Come on, we are talking about a whole 10 minutes clip and you picked up 2 second where you stick your ears one foot out and you may catch something a little bit unusual, and you call that audio destroyed? I listened many times and still can't hear anything unusual. -
^ Probably the "MP3 generation", which thinks house/techno/pile_driver "myouzick" can be called *music*
Last edited by El Heggunte; 10th Jun 2014 at 19:56. Reason: spelling : -/
-
*SIGH*
I've done my best to stay out of this thread, but it's just keeps going and going...
@Cienoway
The crux of the issue with this thread is the same as another in which the OP is looking for a way to automate videotape clean-up. This is a forum filled with video experts and enthusiasts who strive for the best possible solutions and results. Good enough for the "average audience" isn't what the majority of regulars here will settle for.
By your own admission, your technique isn't 100% true and accurate to the original soundtrack. And there in lies the rub. You haven't "defeated Cinivia" as you claim, but rather have developed a technique that's good enough for the "average audience", but not good enough for the majority of members here.
There are those who point their camera at the TV screen or capture their Blu-Ray/DVDs via a capture device reasoning it's good enough. Fortunately, there were those who were not the "average audience" who worked out how to "truly defeat" the protection on DVDs and Blu-Rays which allows us to have EXACT DIGITAL COPIES of the original.
Until someone is able to do that for Cinivia, it hasn't been defeated! -
LOL!!Originally Posted by El Heggunte
^ Probably the "MP3 generation", which thinks house/techno/pile_driver "myouzick" can be called *music*
Yeah I was thinking he is one of these idiots that thinks an MP3 compressed to 128kb sounds the same as an original lossless music recording
But has only an Ipod with earbuds to compare them....
LOL!!!
What ?!?!?!
There are more musical instruments other than a synth and they make more speakers than just a subwoofer ?!?!?!
The hell you say!!!!!
-
Your notion is absurd. There is nothing 100% perfect in the reality world. If you insist on 100% nothing works.Originally Posted by lingyi
If you are playing the original audio file absolutely unmodified, you are still not getting the 100% original sound. Depending on your room, settings, equipment, what you played back is not 100% the same sound as recorded in the original studio. No, not even close, but far from it. This is why some people would still prefer to spend $500+ for a concert ticket, rather than just buy a BluRay disc and watch a concert at home. It's obviously different.
You have to understand one fact that digital audio is only a rough imitation of the natural sound. You sample the audio at 44.1KHz, 48KHz or even 192KHz sample rate, you are simulating the actual sound using a series of pulses. It's only a very rough approximation, not 100% accurate in reflecting the actual sound. Because natural sound is not sampled at 44.1KHz or 48KHz, natural sound contains all frequencies, from zero to infinity, period. So nothing is 100%.
Cinavia is a modification to the original sound. Once modified, it is not 100% authentic. And once modified it is impossible to get the original back. Erasing Cinavia is another modification. Any modification by definition can not get 100%. 100% is unmodified only. Do you know how much Cinavia modified the original? Up to 20% to 25% modified!!!
But you don't need to be 100% to defeat Cinavia. The premise of Cinavia is any attempt to erase it will also destroy audio quality to the extend that it has zero value left, as in pure noise. Anything that erases Cinavia wile maintaining at least SOME entertainment value in the audio, is a success. A method that retains 99% of the quality and value of the audio, is a huge success, and huge defeat to Cinavia. So as long as the average audience feel that the audio is good enough, that is good enough. So long as the average folks feel a Cinavia erased backup is good enough and he/she does not need to purchase a duplicated BluRay disc for backup, then Cinavia is defeated.Last edited by Cienoway; 10th Jun 2014 at 23:37.
-
Cienoway biggest problem is he hasn't told the truth about who he is and what's been happening to him since he started posting on the various forums.
He has managed to enlist the help of folks on the forums (for free) since evidently he is too cheap to do it on his own even though he plans on selling his idea.
So do we care? So far it shouldn't matter to anyone I suppose but he is now using this thread to hopefully make a sell on it.
He started out letting everyone know that he worked for verance and he knew how to break cinavia because he worked for them.
He let it be known during that time months ago that he was fired and disgruntled toward the company for firing him.
He also told that he worked with the cinavia code everyday while employed by verance.
But the problem with all that is his story doesn't add up and the story he tells has been changing.
Just in the past few days he tells that he only worked for verance 90 days, hardly enough time to be a disgruntled hard worker that he claimed earlier.
And definitely not enough time to know much about a top secret code called cinavia.
Even if he did work for them 90 days, which is unlikely, I would imagine he was busy taking out the garbage and doing gofer jobs.
Not even enough time to get through a probation time set by most companies.
He told he wouldn't use any company secrets to break the cinavia code because he signed a NDA.
He was all the time talking about FBI had raided his house and took his computers as evidence.
He didn't know how to copy a disc or how to use media players to get the cinavia message to come up.
Folks on forum had to help him with all that...under the pretense that he had worked for verance and knew how to defeat cinavia.
I don't think there would be many people to believe he didn't know for instance, that the cinavia message waits 20 minutes before it shows up on screen.
My estimation is he is an average joe with very wild unlikely set of stories.
Perhaps he can sell his idea to a wondershat company, who knows?
I hope they know he might bail on providing technical support with stories of the FBI moving in on him.
He would have been better off telling the truth from the start, I think he would have been received much better. -
Once Gonca arrived, the solutions really flowed! I just knew it!
Of course, removal of audio - uh - isn't there a fungus for that? -
I told everything in truth. So which part that I said is inconsistent? Why would Verance hire some one to learn to rip BluRay, or learn how to decrypt BluRay disc to get raw audio? That has nothing to do with Cinavia itself. Cinavia is watermark embedding and extraction on RAW audio, not on BluRay discs. Yes I still do not have a BluRay disc driver myself to rip a BluRay disc myself, and I do not need to. I have enough sample to play myself.Originally Posted by Steve(MS)
Verance fabricated precisely the opposite fairy tale to use FBI to frame me for alleged trade secret theft. They would claim: Look, for 15 years the entire world was unable to crack Cinavia. And this guy worked for us for three months and he turned around to come up with a method to hack Cinavia. So he must have stolen our secret to do it. They told such absurd story despite knowing that I have showed them my code and show them how simple it is and there is absolute no secret taken from them. The truth is they needed a scapegoat and they needed to fabricate a fairy tale of former employee trade secret theft case. Otherwise they can not explain to their customers and shareholders that after they spent $80M investor money and 15 years research time and pushed the scheme to BluRay discs, some how some one comes up with a simple method and a few hundred lines of computer code which cleanly removes Cinavia, rendering the technology useless. They have a pretty big ARSE to cover up, especially consider the Edward Felten event before.
The truth is Cinavia is easily defeated without any knowledge of how Cinavia is embedded. I used the Rubik Cube analogy. You do not need to even know what a Rubik Cube looks like. Close your eyes. Then tweak the cube a few turns any way you want without knowing how you tweaked it. And the detector can no longer recognize the Rubik Cube any more. It's that simple. Numerous scientific research paper already discussed effective audio watermark attack methods. You just need to google to find them. So Verance told a fairy tale when they claim that for 15 years no one cracked Cinavia. Dr. Edward Felten cracked it before the name Cinavia was even invented. Google on the web. Audio watermark removal is not rocket science. Any decent computer programmer, after surveying existing research paper, can come up with similar ideas to defeat Cinavia.
Give Verance a call if you want to find out the truth.
Do I make story? I have the samples for every one to see and hear that I removed Cinavia:
losers_orig.mp3 http://www.firedrive.com/file/62AC44298C5BF228
losers_0607a.mp3 http://www.firedrive.com/file/1B293008C53FD6EELast edited by Cienoway; 11th Jun 2014 at 09:42.
-
Originally Posted by Cienoway
Why do you wanna give out your precious idea and, make peanuts?
Why don't you create your own Cinavia removal app? Get all the money...otherwise
You should contact the companies directly using their email or phone, rather then trying to market this solution to us...
-
I would dispute that. If it is a separate frequency, then it can be removed. That is the whole concept why you can many radio broadcasts all distinctly tunable. Certainly the amplitudes of all the broadcasts, or in this case audio frequency add. But if you have a significant enough time slice, you can to a fourier transform transform, and detect every single frequency separately. Of course nobody does a raw fourier transform on audio signals. That might be useful for constant tones of fixed durations. But with actual audio it becomes far to complex and time consuming. So instead there are various algorithms to perform modified fourier transforms. Since this type of copy protection is not detectable to the human hear, removing it is theoretically quite simple. You just drop out all the frequencies from your modified fourier transform that are outside the range of human hearing. Walla done.Originally Posted by alan1476
Of course that is just theoretical. While coming up with a set of equations to do this is trivial, coming up with actual code that can run in a reasonable amount of time is hard. Nobody would find an algorithm that requires a super computer useful, except someone working for a video archive that could spend that kind of money to restore the original. To come up with a more reasonable algorithm requires identifying the signal so the code can simply try to mangle that without making noticeable audio difference.
Bill -
But the Cinavia signal isn't outside the range of human hearing. It's just relatively inaudible in the context of the base audio.Originally Posted by docbill
-
Your description of how audio watermarks work was wrong. Why even bother guessing, when Verance patents clearly describe how their watermarking scheme works, and even described where their vulnerability is and how they can be defeated. It's ridiculous that nobody still bothered to look up the patents and read them, and every one still claims that Cinavia cannot be easily and effectively removed, when I have done just that, and have direct people to study the patent documents to get an idea how my method works. There are infinite possible ways of removing Cinavia once you get my basic idea, and none rely on knowing any trade secret or inside parameter at all, thus practically none of any improvement or modification from the current technology scheme will allow Verance to salvage their Cinavia technology. The science itself is broken. They need to go back to drawing board and design something completely different to produce something that is actually secure and works.Originally Posted by docbill
I would dispute that. If it is a separate frequency, then it can be removed. That is the whole concept why you can many radio broadcasts all distinctly tunable. Certainly the amplitudes of all the broadcasts, or in this case audio frequency add. But if you have a significant enough time slice, you can to a fourier transform transform, and detect every single frequency separately. Of course nobody does a raw fourier transform on audio signals. That might be useful for constant tones of fixed durations. But with actual audio it becomes far to complex and time consuming. So instead there are various algorithms to perform modified fourier transforms. Since this type of copy protection is not detectable to the human hear, removing it is theoretically quite simple. You just drop out all the frequencies from your modified fourier transform that are outside the range of human hearing. Walla done.Originally Posted by alan1476
Of course that is just theoretical. While coming up with a set of equations to do this is trivial, coming up with actual code that can run in a reasonable amount of time is hard. Nobody would find an algorithm that requires a super computer useful, except someone working for a video archive that could spend that kind of money to restore the original. To come up with a more reasonable algorithm requires identifying the signal so the code can simply try to mangle that without making noticeable audio difference.
Bill
If you still do not want to bother reading patent documents, then look at google search using "spread spectrum audio watermark". I am sick and tired of keep telling people that and still no one bothers to even google something. I may never disclose my method as it seems there is a general lack of interest in removing watermarks at all, anyway. -
You maybe right. I remember a while back I approached slysoft regarding the negative 13 pitch shift solution...and they were pretty knit picky regarding how it sounded and, suggested to do better. Also pointed out the" people will just get a Cinavia free hardware" bit. And also I approached DVDfab...they seem interested at 1st but then...they simply stop returning my emails. Keep in mind...this was free. It would have been cool if they incorporated a cheesy idea of mine. Maybe they might be more pleased with your solution. But that's not saying much. You should contact them. If you already haven't.Originally Posted by Cienoway
-
So there is or not a program that EASY REALLY REMOVES/DISABLES CINAVIA PROTECTION for bluray movies and have the same quality sound?
A lot of thanks. -
In a word, no.Originally Posted by fits79
-
-
Your question asked if there was a program that removes Cinavia and keeps the same quality sound. There isn't one.
However, there is a program that purports to remove Cinavia in a few select Blu-ray titles, and they are adding to that list of titles fairly often now. That program is called DVDRanger CinEX. Even they do not claim to give the same quality of sound in output compared to the original DTS HD MA audio, but their solution does work to give you a copy of the movie, with sound, that does not trigger Cinavia. How they achieve this is a matter of some controversy. Most of us here believe they take sections of the original sound and combine it with audio from another source that does not contain Cinavia, like the AC3 from a DVD, or the audio from a streaming movie. But no one can prove this.
There should be a trial for DVDRanger CinEx if you wish to try it. Their overall reputation is unsavory, so caveat emptor when dealing with them. -
No, there is not any way yet to "remove" or "defeat" cinavia.
Removing or defeating cinavia and replacing the audio with re-encoded inferior quality audio are two VERY different things!!!!!
DVDRanger is doing the latter at best. -
Why is so difficult to remove cinavia protection from any bluray movie???
As i see for years soon or later all protection it can be hacked but the cinavia it is years now and no - one can defeat it.
Why is that happening?
Is so hard and difficult protection? -
THREE posts in a short time about this? You're just being a jerk. Are you the new gamemaniaco? Your posts look like his.Originally Posted by fits79
Cinavia puts a watermark in audio above the range of normal human hearing. It can't be removed as it is part of the audio. The only thing known to work is that it's possible to change the audio enough through audio editors to make the watermark undetectable, but the watermark still remains and the changes necessary to keep it from being detected make the audio quality worse. Despite Cienoway's insistence that he and he alone knows a secret way to truly remove Cinavia, nobody has been able to do so.
Quote
Similar Threads
-
cinavia in 2in1
By asiafan in forum Authoring (Blu-ray)Replies: 11Last Post: 29th Jun 2013, 17:20 -
Cinavia technicals
By leghorn in forum Newbie / General discussionsReplies: 10Last Post: 14th Jan 2013, 04:28 -
Does The Three Muskteers use Cinavia?
By wulf109 in forum Blu-ray RippingReplies: 33Last Post: 18th Mar 2012, 10:56 -
Cinavia and mkv2vob
By leamingtonspaceman in forum Video ConversionReplies: 2Last Post: 10th Mar 2011, 17:16 -
dvd stuck in dvd player - best removal technique?
By ChaunceyK in forum Off topicReplies: 9Last Post: 22nd Mar 2010, 20:07