Robust Watermarking using Hidden Markov Models

Software piracy is the unauthorized copying or distribution of software. It is a growing problem that results in annual losses in the billions of dollars. Prevention is a difficult problem since digital documents are easy to copy and distribute. Watermarking is a possible defense against software piracy. A software watermark consists of information embedded in the software, which allows it to be identified. A watermark can act as a deterrent to unauthorized copying, since it can be used to provide evidence for legal action against those responsible for piracy.In this project, we present a novel software watermarking scheme that is inspired by the success of previous research focused on detecting metamorphic viruses. We use a trained hidden Markov model (HMM) to detect a specific copy of software. We give experimental results that show our scheme is robust. That is, we can identify the original software even after it has been extensively modified, as might occur as part of an attack on the watermarking scheme

HIDDEN MARKOV MODELS FOR SOFTWARE PIRACY DETECTION

The unauthorized copying of software is often referred to as software piracy. Soft- ware piracy causes billions of dollars of annual losses for companies and governments worldwide. In this project, we analyze a method for detecting software piracy. A meta- morphic generator is used to create morphed copies of a base piece of software. A hidden Markov Model is trained on the opcode sequences extracted from these mor- phed copies. The trained model is then used to score suspect software to determine its similarity to the base software. A high score indicates that the suspect software may be a modified version of the base software and, therefore, further investigation is warranted. In contrast, a low score indicates that the suspect software differs sig- nificantly from the base software. We show that our approach is robust, in the sense that the base software must be extensively modified before it is not detected

Windows Vista: Securing Itself against Competition?

About the end of 2006, Microsoft began delivering its new Windows Vista PC operating system to large commercial customers, followed by final users and small businesses. Even before the product reached the market, the dominant provider of PC operating systems worldwide was accused over and over of abusing its market power in order to hinder competitors. After the integration of Internet Explorer (Windows 95) and the Windows Media Player (Windows XP), competitors today are objecting most strongly to the new security components associated with the Windows Vista Security Center, and the EU Commission has joined in these objections. Opponents have criticized the bundling of previously independent components (transfer of market power through bundling), and security software providers like Symantec and McAfee have argued that limiting access to the core of the operating system will hinder their product development activities. In line with the tradition in EU competition policy, Microsoft's dominance of the PC operating system market justifies supervision of that provider in the interests of preventing abuse. However, the final assessment must take into account unique circumstances arising from the specific market and competitive conditions in the standard software markets. In particular, competition policy should intervene in the PC operating system market only if a demonstrable improvement in the public welfare can be attained as a result. In essence, this means that policymakers should intervene to ensure fair innovation competition, including the introduction of reasonable transparency requirements with respect to operating system interfaces in order to allow regulators to manage potential conflicts between the operating system manufacturer and providers of competing software components (e.g. web browsers, media players or security software). There is need for reform in this area in order to create a reliable and functional system of rules for all market participants. However, unbundling decrees which require strict separation of certain system components are an unsuitable instrument for this purpose.competition policy, Microsoft, operating system markets, platform competition

Limitation of Sales Warranties as an Alternative to Intellectual Property Rights: An Empirical Analysis of IPhone Warranties’ Deterrent Impact on Consumers

Apple\u27s success with the Apple iPhone has brought with it certain problems. Its success has engendered a community that has attempted to circumvent Apple\u27s exclusive service agreement with AT&T. Unfortunately for Apple (and similarly situated manufacturers), intellectual property law allows consumers to alter their products so as to circumvent relationships that manufacturers may have with others. The patent and copyright law first sale doctrine allows consumers to manipulate a product after it is purchased. As a result, manufacturers are increasingly turning to alternatives to intellectual property to secure control over the device after the sale. One such alternative is the exclusion of warranty under Article 2 of the Uniform Commercial Code. This iBrief considers whether limitation of warranties have the deterrence effect manufacturers desire. Said differently, it considers whether manufacturers can use warranty limitations to prevent consumers from using their products in an unauthorized manner. The iBrief presents a behavioral model based on the Triandis model of planned behavior and enhances the model by accounting for likely and unlikely benefits and detriments. The model suggests that participants weigh the probability and magnitude of the detriment against the probability and magnitude of the beneficial impact when making the decision to engage in technological piracy. This model, considered with other empirical evidence, suggests that Apple\u27s warranty could be a stronger deterrent for consumers than civil liability. The iBrief concludes that manufacturers can better protect their post-sale expectation of profits by raising consumer awareness of their warranty\u27s quality and by raising awareness of the consequences for using the product in a way that is outside the terms of the consumers\u27 authorized use

Pervasively Distributed Copyright Enforcement

In an effort to control flows of unauthorized information, the major copyright industries are pursuing a range of strategies designed to distribute copyright enforcement functions across a wide range of actors and to embed these functions within communications networks, protocols, and devices. Some of these strategies have received considerable academic and public scrutiny, but much less attention has been paid to the ways in which all of them overlap and intersect with one another. This article offers a framework for theorizing this process. The distributed extension of intellectual property enforcement into private spaces and throughout communications networks can be understood as a new, hybrid species of disciplinary regime that locates the justification for its pervasive reach in a permanent state of crisis. This hybrid regime derives its force neither primarily from centralized authority nor primarily from decentralized, internalized norms, but instead from a set of coordinated processes for authorizing flows of information. Although the success of this project is not yet assured, its odds of success are by no means remote as skeptics have suggested. Power to implement crisis management in the decentralized marketplace for digital content arises from a confluence of private and public interests and is amplified by the dynamics of technical standards processes. The emergent regime of pervasively distributed copyright enforcement has profound implications for the production of the networked information society

Piracy prevention methods in software business

Abstract. There are various forms of piracy in software business, and many prevention techniques have been developed against them. Forms of software piracy are, for example, cracks and serials, softlifting and hard disk loading, internet piracy and software counterfeiting, mischanneling, reverse engineering, and tampering. There are various prevention methods that target these types of piracy, although all of these methods have been broken. The piracy prevention measures can be divided into ethical, legal, and technical measures. Technical measures include measures like obfuscation and tamper-proofing, for example. However, relying on a single method does not provide complete protection from attacks against intellectual property, so companies wishing to protect their product should consider combining multiple methods of piracy prevention