Briefly: iPhone dates, iTunes Plus watermarks, Apple updates

[AppleInsider]

The shell game of the iPhone's actual release date continued on its erratic course this week. Meanwhile, Apple's newly-unlocked music files appear to be keeping users honest through fingerprints. And, earlier this week, the company issued a pair of important fixes.

iPhone release date fixed at last?

The real release date for the iPhone may be a pragmatic one, AppleInsider has been told.

A contact who has filed accurate reports in the past notes that Friday, June 29th is the date being passed around at some Apple retail stores this week.

The initial date of availability for the inaugural Apple handset has been the subject of feverish speculation in recent weeks. A June 29th launch, while largely considered a rumor at this time, would corresponds the company's recent practice (1, 2) of holding some of its high-profile consumer product launches at the end of the week. It would also conform to Apple's official "late June" launch window and recent comments by company chief executive Steve Jobs.

Previous predictions have often fallen short of the mark. Many had initially suggested that Apple CEO Steve Jobs would use his June 11th keynote for the Worldwide Developer Conference to announce the device, a claim which has since been shot down after Apple http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=2655">narrowed down the release to the end of the month.

Others have attempted unsuccessfully to extract a release date from AT&T's retail outlets. News network CNBC had used this method in May to claim a June 20th launch but has since been contradicted by other chains, which reported release dates as early as the now discredited June 11th and no later than the 22nd.

iTunes Plus may contain watermarks

Apple's introduction of iTunes Plus this week has made songs easier to transfer between devices but may include its own subtle means of discouraging open piracy, according to an investigation.

A test in which two separate iTunes accounts bought the same iTunes Plus song has revealed that the files are different despite otherwise identical data, suggesting that Apple has embedded account names into the files that ultimately reach customer computers. Such information could reportedly be used to track the origins of songs that appear on peer-to-peer networks.

Since the files can be readily copied and produce identical files when converted to different formats, the report determines that Apple's changes appear to be a simple matter of embedding non-obvious text, rather than actively encrypting content.

Apple issues Xserve fix, revised security update

Rounding out the week were two Apple hotfixes, primarily aimed at sorting out security issues.

The company's Xserve Lights-Out Management Firmware Update 1.0 (760KB download) repairs a security vulnerability in the remote management hardware for its Intel-based Xserve computers. It also improves the overall reliability of the management and monitoring tools, Apple says.

The update can be applied through Mac OS X on the host machine or remotely through a command line shell.

Finally, Apple has also delivered version 1.1 of its Security Update 2007-005 released early this week.

The download (15.7MB for PowerPC, 29.2MB for Intel) removes a configuration file that stopped the BIND service from automatically launching after the patch is installed. The update chiefly affects Mac OS X Server systems, which are most likely to enable BIND. Neither Client nor Server versions of the OS enable BIND by default.

[ View this article at AppleInsider.com ]

[Neruda]

Originally Posted by AppleInsider

... "late June" launch window and recent comments by company chief executive Steve Jobs.

Jobs' comments were said strictly in jest, and I don't think they can be used to pin down any specific release date for the iPhone. June 11th, June 6th, June 29th....the real news is that nobody knows. Enough with the useless speculation.

[Kasper]

Originally Posted by Neruda

Jobs' comments were said strictly in jest, and I don't think they can be used to pin down any specific release date for the iPhonel. June 11th, June 6th, June 29th....the real news is that nobody knows. Enough with the useless speculation.

For the record: AppleInsider has not speculated previously on the iPhone date. We may have covered other publication's speculation, but none of our own.

Best,

K

[Neruda]

Originally Posted by Kasper

We may have covered other publication's speculation, but none of our own.

Best,

K

Sorry, but this is what I was referring to. I did not mean to imply that Appleinsider suggested the dates I listed.

[JeffDM]

Originally Posted by AppleInsider

A test in which two separate iTunes accounts bought the same iTunes Plus song has revealed that the files are different despite otherwise identical data, suggesting that Apple has embedded account names into the files that ultimately reach customer computers. Such information could reportedly be used to track the origins of songs that appear on peer-to-peer networks.

And that was just one test. I don't think anyone else has performed said comparison.

Since the files can be readily copied and produce identical files when converted to different formats, the report determines that Apple's changes appear to be a simple matter of embedding non-obvious text, rather than actively encrypting content.

Single byte values scattered throughout the file? That's not much for text.

[Kasper]

Originally Posted by Neruda

Sorry, but this is what I was referring to. I did not mean to imply that Appleinsider suggested the dates I listed.

No -- I hear what you're saying. It is annoying. I agree with you. But my point is: just because other outlets have beat the issue to death, it shouldn't preclude us from at least taking one stab at it ourselves

Enjoy your weekend,

K

[chris v]

Get info on any song you've bought from iTunes (while in iTunes) and right there in the Summary pane, it lists your name & email. It's nothing new, as this has been the case with the old .m4p protected files, as well. It's not like this is some explosive story, brough to light by an intrepid investigator tirelessly digging deep into the unknown bowels of iTunes, or anything.

[mrjoec123]

Originally Posted by Kasper

No -- I hear what you're saying. It is annoying. I agree with you. But my point is: just because other outlets have beat the issue to death, it shouldn't preclude us from at least taking one stab at it ourselves

Enjoy your weekend,

K

June 22nd or 29th always made the most sense to me. Apple will most likely hold special events at all the Apple Retail stores the night of the first availability, just as they did with Tiger and Panther. And those events are always on Friday nights. The store usually closes at 5, then reopens at 6 with special deals, etc. Usually goes on past midnight. (At least it did in Palo Alto.) Microsoft tried to copy this idea with Vista, and it was just sad.

The only reason why the 29th might not be the best date is that it's the opening night for Pixar's new Ratatouille film. Not that it matters too much, but a lot of Apple fans are Pixar fans, too. Wouldn't want those two events to conflict and cut into Disney's profits.

So I'm hoping for the 22nd, but the 29th is probably the night.

[kenaustus]

I wouldn't be surprised if it was the 29th simply because it allow more time to produce and ship more iPhones into the various stores. Since the ramp isn't up to a million a month (yet) the extra production time would be very helpful for some - especially those that could say "I got the last one in the store" -v- "I've got to wait a whole week to get mine".

[William John]

For what it is worth, not much I'm sure, I was in my local AT&T shoppe last week and asked the worker bee about the iPhone. He said June 15. He said his iPhone training has been almost completed and he was ready to roll. The three other workers there were trying to get a Blackberry to work for a customer, another story there I bet. They rolled their eyes when the iPhone was mentioned and volunteered that the Blackberry was much better. I then asked why It was taking three of them to get it to work? I left.

[freeny]

June 29th also happens to be the release date of "Ratatouille"
coincidence?...

[SpamSandwich]

Originally Posted by William John

They rolled their eyes when the iPhone was mentioned and volunteered that the Blackberry was much better. I then asked why It was taking three of them to get it to work? I left.

[mjtomlin]

Originally Posted by AppleInsider

Since the files can be readily copied and produce identical files when converted to different formats, the report determines that Apple's changes appear to be a simple matter of embedding non-obvious text, rather than actively encrypting content.

I wouldn't say it's "non-obvious" when you can click "Get Info" and clearly see the "Purchased By" and "Account Name" tags containing my name and account respectively.

[Kickaha]

Try it from another account - can you still see the info?

[floccus]

Actually, a forum user over on MacRumors has pretty much shown that the person who first suggested that Apple was tagging Plus music goofed in her technique. She's since ammended her post to show that the files will indeed come out identical.

As for the iPhone release date, I think Apple will want to launch earlier in the week than Friday. Sure there will be plenty of demand, but the issue would be supply carrying over till Monday. Smart move would be to launch on a Monday, and re-supply later in the week. Then again, who knows what demand will truly be. To draw a parallel, which system's launch will the iPhone end up emulating... the PS3 or the Wii?

[indiemike]

it won't emulate either of them. iPhone isin't a videogame that people are going to pitch tents infront of best buy to get.

that's good news though, now all i want to hear is a date for Canada.

[nagromme]

Agreed. People won't pitch tents in front of Best Buy for the iPhone. They won't need tents because the weather's warm, and the stores they'll be camped out in front of will be Apple stores

And MacRumors has tentatively retracted the watermarking story. The current theory seems to be simply that the modification dates on the two song files was different. Running the audio portion through editing apps reveals it to be identical, bit for bit, when bought by two different accounts. Thus, no watermark/fingerprint. There is, however, non-hidden metadata you can see just with Get Info. That's different from a watermark.

[garbi]

I just updated my EMI purchased songs to DRM-free versions. I then copied one of them to the desktop, opened it in a plain text editor and searched for my name.

First fact: it's there, in the middle of the raw song data.

I then tried to remove my name using a text editor but after that operation the AAC file won't play anymore in any of the audio player I have (iTunes, Quicktime, VLC, AudioFinder, etc.)

Second fact: it is not trivial to remove.

Conclusion: I'd say that there is indeed some kind of watermark in there.

It might not be very sophisticated - real watermarks go well beyond adding a name somewhere in a file and are rather interwoven with the actual data - but you should be careful, as your name might also be there in some encoded format (or in a "real" interwoven watermark). In any case, if you simply give away your DRM-free songs, it is easy for Apple/EMI to track it back to you, unless you know how to remove the name/watermark properly.

One can see watermarking as an optimistic DRM scheme: Apple/EMI assume that most people who buy music are honest and they deal with the exceptions a posteriori, possibly via some legal action. The protected AAC approach on the other hand is a pessimistic DRM scheme: it assumes that most people are cheaters and tries to prevent dishonest behaviors a priori.

Personally, I very much prefer the optimistic approach, as it avoids annoying honest people with artificial restrictions. In my view, trying to protect content is not a problem but preventing people who paid for it to use it is. As usual, Apple seems to push a kind of "fair play" approach, where the user experience is the priority rather than having a 100% bullet-proof DRM scheme (which is known to be impossible anyway). I believe this is the right approach.

--
Benoît

[Morris]

Originally Posted by garbi

I just updated my EMI purchased songs to DRM-free versions. I then copied one of them to the desktop, opened it in a plain text editor and searched for my name.

First fact: it's there, in the middle of the raw song data.

The name is there in so called 'atoms'. These can exist at the beginning of the file or at the end. They are nothing special and are like the ID3 tags of MP4 files.
Moreover, tests have shown that the audio data is identical between files bought under different accounts so the only place where this is stored is in meta-data.

I then tried to remove my name using a text editor but after that operation the AAC file won't play anymore in any of the audio player I have (iTunes, Quicktime, VLC, AudioFinder, etc.)

Second fact: it is not trivial to remove.

Benoît

The reason they won't play is because you screwed up the file by writing a binary file with a text editor. This data exists only in meta-data. Get a decent meta-data editor and you can easily remove it. Try AtomicParsley for instance.

The suggestion that all players have been changed to support 'Apple's watermarking' is ludicrous.

[demenas]

Originally Posted by mjtomlin

I wouldn't say it's "non-obvious" when you can click "Get Info" and clearly see the "Purchased By" and "Account Name" tags containing my name and account respectively.

My impression was that Apple was embedding the purchaser's information somewhere hard to find *in addition* to the easily seen fields you are referring to.

Steve

[solipsism]

Originally Posted by mrjoec123

June 22nd or 29th always made the most sense to me. Apple will most likely hold special events at all the Apple Retail stores the night of the first availability, just as they did with Tiger and Panther. And those events are always on Friday nights. The store usually closes at 5, then reopens at 6 with special deals, etc. Usually goes on past midnight. (At least it did in Palo Alto.) Microsoft tried to copy this idea with Vista, and it was just sad.

The only reason why the 29th might not be the best date is that it's the opening night for Pixar's new Ratatouille film. Not that it matters too much, but a lot of Apple fans are Pixar fans, too. Wouldn't want those two events to conflict and cut into Disney's profits.

So I'm hoping for the 22nd, but the 29th is probably the night.

There is a major difference here; the iPhone will also be sold at AT&T stores. I'm guessing that it will be sold at both stores at the same time.

I agree with your assessment of June 29th as a bad day for a release. Personally, I'm leaning toward the 22nd as a release date. I do expect to see an iPhone commercial during the previews for Ratatouille. My only question is whether it's the same one shown at the Academy Awards or a new one.

PS: I'm actually postponing my trip out of the States a day to the 22nd to help make sure I can get an iPhone right away. I'd wait until July if I could, but unfortunately I can't.

Originally Posted by demenas

My impression was that Apple was embedding the purchaser's information somewhere hard to find *in addition* to the easily seen fields you are referring to.

That appears to be have been dismissed. Still it won't keep the complainers from bitching about easily removed meta data that has been in all iTunes Store purchases since day one.

I'm pretty sure the idea of watermarking would have been discussed, especially by EMI, but eventually dismissed when it was discovered that watermarking would be easily removed within days or even hours of the iTunes Plus launch.

[nvidia2008]

Originally Posted by nagromme

Agreed. People won't pitch tents in front of Best Buy for the iPhone. They won't need tents because the weather's warm, and the stores they'll be camped out in front of will be Apple stores

There'll probably be an intentional leak to Wall Street Journal about iPhone launch date, otherwise an all-out announcement a few days before the launch.
Expect the queues to be FRICKING MASSSIVE.

[Morris]

Originally Posted by demenas

My impression was that Apple was embedding the purchaser's information somewhere hard to find *in addition* to the easily seen fields you are referring to.

Steve

So far nobody has found any purchaser information outside of the easily editable meta data field. The fact that the audio data itself is completely identical between songs purchased under different accounts is proof there is no steganography being used.

The account name is being stored in the files ever since day one of the iTMS. Nothing has changed, except they now come without DRM. This basically is no news whatsoever. It was news in 2003.

[solipsism]

Originally Posted by nvidia2008

There'll probably be an intentional leak to Wall Street Journal about iPhone launch date, otherwise an all-out announcement a few days before the launch.
Expect the queues to be FRICKING MASSSIVE.

Oh course. Apple may do fairly well with keeping it's own Apple Store employees tight lipped but there is no way that AT&T will be able to keep its thousands of employees in its thousands of stores from not saying anything.

The only way Apple can get around that is to do an initial launch in the Apple Stores in the evening, as previously stated, and then overnight the iPhones to AT&T stores for sale the next day. But I don't see this happening.

There are also the new iPhone call center techs. I'm certain that these employees have no idea of the launch date but it will become obvious soon enough. I'm guessing it will be the day after they finish training, which I recall is on the 21st.

[akhomerun]

I still don't understand why PowerPC updates are always smaller in filesize than the Intel ones. Sometimes the intel updates are twice the size of the PowerPC ones.

[solipsism]

Originally Posted by akhomerun

I still don't understand why PowerPC updates are always smaller in filesize than the Intel ones. Sometimes the intel updates are twice the size of the PowerPC ones.

Intel updates are Universal Binaries contained both PPC and Intel code, while the PPC versions are strictly for PPCs. I have no idea why they do tis but I speculate that Apple keeps a separate PPC version is specifically to keep the file sizes down in older machines that came with much smaller capacity HDDS. And use UB for Intel so it will be backwards compatible with PPC versions if one should need to move a file or two to an older Mac.

Just my 02¢.

[iMichael]

I called an AT&T store near me a couple of weeks back, and the rep told me June 15th was the release date. He sounded so sure!!

I scheduled off that day, just for the heck of it.

But, whatever day it is, I'll go to the store and hopefully be able to buy one.

If not, I will be bummed, but it's not the end of the world.

[Louzer]

First off, it really is a 'who cares' type of thing. It only matters to those limited individuals who must have the newest thing the very first day. Its amazing how little people value their time.

Second, I really can't imagine Apple starting this thing off on a Friday. It makes no sense from Apple's point of view. Apple lives by the free publicity they get from the news cycles they create from their big keynotes and special presentations. But if no one's watching (who's watching or reading the news on friday nighs except already die-hard mac heads?), then there is no benefit. (I don't think using two small products like the iPod shuffle v2 and the iPod Nano (Red) are signs that Apple's shifting to a weekend announcement - those aren't trailblazing products by any sense of imagination).

This is why their new products usually get announced Tuesdays (when most people are really starting the week).

As for the 29th, that idea sucks even more then doing it on a friday. The 29th leads into the July 4th week, which, will surely mean more people on vacation then not. Again, fewer heads seeing the news.

Finally, did you know that the music you have also, blatantly, reveals personal information about the artists as well? Its true. Right there, on a song I purchased from the store, has the name John Mayer right on it! And they don't even try to hide it. You can see it right in front of you in iTunes!

And the latest I hear is that, besides your email address, they've put your SSN in the files too! Its true, I checked. Now, they've broken it up into pieces, but its easy enough to spot. Just use a text editor and scan the entire file. You'll see every number of your SSN right there in plain text! Its amazing that no one has mentioned this yet!

Apple should be embarrassed with these slipups!

[garbi]

Originally Posted by Morris

The name is there in so called 'atoms'. These can exist at the beginning of the file or at the end. They are nothing special and are like the ID3 tags of MP4 files.
Moreover, tests have shown that the audio data is identical between files bought under different accounts so the only place where this is stored is in meta-data.
The reason they won't play is because you screwed up the file by writing a binary file with a text editor. This data exists only in meta-data. Get a decent meta-data editor and you can easily remove it. Try AtomicParsley for instance.

Agreed but using AtomicParsley is not exactly what I would call "trivial", at least for the average user. BTW, did you try to remove the purchaser's name from the metadata section and play it afterwards?

Originally Posted by Morris

The suggestion that all players have been changed to support 'Apple's watermarking' is ludicrous.

I never suggested that, only that removing the purchaser's name metadata was screwing up the file, no matter what audio player you were using.

[Swift]

I really, really doubt that there's any serious "watermarking" built into the new no-DRM files. I think that when hackers test these names, they'll see that there are text strings with name and Apple ID built into the files, but that's it. (From what I've understood, Apple's DRM is simply a hash of name and Apple ID. If it wasn't downloaded with the ID in the iTunes you're using, and it's not playing on an "authorized" machine. then it won't play.)

But when there's no more hashing or key, the name and ID remain. There's lots of possible, internal reasons. One, iTunes wants to keep track of your purchases. It wants to suggest, "you may want this." It wants to keep track of your iTunes plus versus normal DRM'ed tracks. If, someday, Sony/BMI offers non-DRMed 5.1 surround -- that'd be cool -- iTunes wants to keep track of what YOU purchased, to offer you, say, another .30 per track update. No? Should it offer to update tracks you ripped off a CD? Or, uh, stole? Apple doesn't think so, and neither do I.

Where it would get sinister would be a) if it acted like the Zune, and wouldn't authorize your friend's iTunes plus track being copied to your iTunes. It wouldn't be non-DRM, then, would it, or b) if just changing the ID strings stopped the tracks from playing. I think in a few days it will be clear: there will be an editor for changing the ownership strings -- for those of you who want to put your iTunes plus tracks on Pirate Bay, I suggest changing the strings to Bill Gates, zune@mac.com, or Hillary Rosen, riaa@mac.com.

And if it can be changed easily, then the id's will be of no legal use whatsover.

[JeffDM]

Originally Posted by Louzer

And the latest I hear is that, besides your email address, they've put your SSN in the files too! Its true, I checked. Now, they've broken it up into pieces, but its easy enough to spot. Just use a text editor and scan the entire file. You'll see every number of your SSN right there in plain text! Its amazing that no one has mentioned this yet!

You are joking, right? Probably every possible alphanumeric character is in the file somewhere several times. Or is this your point?

[solipsism]

Originally Posted by JeffDM

You are joking, right? Probably every possible alphanumeric character is in the file somewhere several times. Or is this your point?

Yeah, he's joking. It's quite funny.

[melgross]

Originally Posted by Louzer

And the latest I hear is that, besides your email address, they've put your SSN in the files too! Its true, I checked. Now, they've broken it up into pieces, but its easy enough to spot. Just use a text editor and scan the entire file. You'll see every number of your SSN right there in plain text! Its amazing that no one has mentioned this yet!

Apple should be embarrassed with these slipups!

You're right!

In the '60's I had a six head auto-reverse tape deck.

When the info came out about playing the Beatles albums backwards to hear "special messages" they put in them, such as "Paul is dead", I rewired my deck so that I could record them and play them backwards.

By damn! After you played those bits back fifteen or twenty times, you could hear it plain as day. A little weed helped too!

Amazing, what?

[piot]

Does anyone know if there is any account info embedded in WMA tracks purchased from Napster, Zune Market Place etc?

[solipsism]

Originally Posted by piot

Does anyone know if there is any account info embedded in WMA tracks purchased from Napster, Zune Market Place etc?

That is going to be hard as we'll have to find someone who has used those services.

[piot]

Originally Posted by solipsism

That is going to be hard as we'll have to find someone who has used those services.

Yeh I know. I thought perhaps someone might have a "friend" who could help out.

[solipsism]

iPhone release date confirmed: yours on June 29th

Ready to pony the cash? Looks like our source was right: the iPhone is yours come June 29th. The commercial just aired on 60 Minutes, and now you can finally mark your calendar and get on with your life -- for the next 25 days or so, until you get in line for your spankin' new $600 iPhone.

P.S. -Anyone have a copy of it on their DVR or something? Hook us up, we'll post it here.

[Thanks to everyone who sent this in]

As Louzer mentions in a previous post, that seems to be a poor date to release the iPhone.

[EmAn]

There have been at least 2 commercials during the Yankees/Red Sox game tonight confirming the June 29 date also.

[nvidia2008]

Originally Posted by solipsism

Oh course. Apple may do fairly well with keeping it's own Apple Store employees tight lipped but there is no way that AT&T will be able to keep its thousands of employees in its thousands of stores from not saying anything.

The only way Apple can get around that is to do an initial launch in the Apple Stores in the evening, as previously stated, and then overnight the iPhones to AT&T stores for sale the next day. But I don't see this happening.

There are also the new iPhone call center techs. I'm certain that these employees have no idea of the launch date but it will become obvious soon enough. I'm guessing it will be the day after they finish training, which I recall is on the 21st.

Originally Posted by nvidia2008

There'll probably be an intentional leak to Wall Street Journal about iPhone launch date, otherwise an all-out announcement a few days before the launch.
Expect the queues to be FRICKING MASSSIVE.

Originally Posted by EmAn

There have been at least 2 commercials during the Yankees/Red Sox game tonight confirming the June 29 date also.

Well, full Apple announcement. Frack me. Countdown Time.....!! Get your DashCode fired up and let's see some widgetry.

Also, start getting your cholestomy bags/ cathethers and so on. You'll be waiting in line for several days for these babies.

Originally Posted by solipsism

Intel updates are Universal Binaries contained both PPC and Intel code, while the PPC versions are strictly for PPCs. I have no idea why they do tis but I speculate that Apple keeps a separate PPC version is specifically to keep the file sizes down in older machines that came with much smaller capacity HDDS. And use UB for Intel so it will be backwards compatible with PPC versions if one should need to move a file or two to an older Mac. Just my 02¢.

$2.00 ...Interesting ideas there.