Is the Rygol 2000-series hack, piracy or an smart marketing ploy by Rygol - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / testgear

author: Rutger
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: August 14, 2013, 10:24:10 pm
content: Is selling a $ 1600 crippled scope for $ 800 with and easy to find hack a smart ploy by Rygol to sell more units to hobbyist or should the hack be considered piracy?By making it easy for hackers to find a way to change a $ 800 scope into a $ 1600 scope I am sure that Rygol is actually profiting from free advertizement and many hobbyist will be tempted to by this scope and hack it. Are Rygol really selling less $ 1600 scopes because of this hack, I don't think so, because people who want a 200MHz scope usually want to make sure that it is calibrated for that spec. So I think Rygol saved not only by making one hardware platform, but also profits from extra sales at the lower end. They are laughing all the way to the bank.What do you think?

author: kizzap
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: August 14, 2013, 11:22:29 pm
content: they would be laughing all the way to the bank if everyone who wanted the 200MHz model actually went out andBOUGHTthe 200MHz model with all the added features...If I were the director of Rigol, and had any idea of the hacks going on, I would be doing my best to patch this issue and ensure that it doesn't become possible again.That said, I'm not the director, so I will be buying said scope and hacking it-kizzap

author: jasonbrent
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: August 15, 2013, 01:25:14 am
content: I get quite a kick out of people purporting that this is a ploy or conscious thought for any manufacture to make their product "easy to hack".If anything, this is some level of incompetence in engineering design but mostly persistence of those who like taking things apart.From any business perspective, COGS unification across a part line is high value... and if you can differentiate via software for a given hardware line, that's just money in the bank.There is no way Rigol wants this hacked. Given the demand of this series at the moment, I'd honestly be surprised if they weren't seriously evaluating how to _prevent_ this from happening vs. encouraging it.Then again, if they are smart, they will just leave it alone... there's no security at all when someone has physical access to a device. Their only real solution would be a separate hardware line that couldn't be upgraded via software... but again, that goes into R&D and COGS, so it's a catch-22.Anyway... off my virtual soapbox and to the real point:The first rule about fight club is..-jbl

author: Sigmoid
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 15, 2013, 02:12:12 am
content: Well you aren't circumventing copy protection, nor selling illicit copies of intellectual property, so no, it's not piracy.(EDIT: It's exactly like jailbreaking an iPhone to install 3rd party apps.)As for whether Rigol wants to plug the hole or not, I dunno, it's very much a high level business decision. Market fragmentation is one of the oldest tricks in the book of marketing strategies, and I'm quite certain the hack doesn't interfere with that. (EDIT: In fact, it might have a net positive effect.)To be clear, market fragmentation doesn't mean "have people pay less for the less capable device, and more for the more capable one". It's "have the people who CAN AFFORD to pay more pay more, and still do business for people who CANNOT AFFORD it at a lower price point". There's an entire school around this, and nobody has it mastered more than airlines. XD The device capabilities don't count. It's "if you're an enterprise with a huge budget, you should pay me a lot, but I still want to be able to sell to HAM hobbyists on a budget". It's not about the WHAT, it's about the WHO.And people who CAN and are willing to pay $1600 for the scope won't bother with the hack (they will mostly be enterprise customers, and those just want 100 of the things shipped and installed at the factory, no fuss). And in the lower market segment, yes, Rigol may be even poaching some potential sales from Siglent and various other competitors due to this hack.

author: Rutger
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: August 15, 2013, 02:25:30 am
content: Hands up for those who bought the DS1052e because you could hack it to 100Mhz, I did...I think Rigol sold of the more DS1052e units than they would have without a possible hack, that is hard to proof but it seems very likely.It gave them tons of free advertizing and who wouldn't like a "free" upgrade?I still think Rigol took notice and did not make it very difficult to hack the next scope they developed. If they wanted to make it hard, they could have, I am sure about that, they could have added extra hardware without it costing to much more. For the price difference you can put a lot of road blocks in the way of hackers.They aren't just going to make it so easy and obvious, but they have already spend the money to develop this new unit and even at the $ 800 price point they are still making money. I still think they are counting on selling enough more low-end units to make up for the "potential" loss of the high-end units.The question still remains, is this piracy?You have paid for the hardware, but hacked the software?And who is now thinking about buying this unit because they can hack it?

author: Sigmoid
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 15, 2013, 02:30:06 am
content: Quote from: Rutger on August 15, 2013, 02:25:30 amNo it's not. Piracy is distributing illicit copies of software. You aren't copying anything.In fact in the US there was some kind of court precedent or something around jailbroken iPhones stating that this sort of thing is not piracy. Not a lawyer so I don't know the exact case, I read about it in the news.

author: leafi
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: August 15, 2013, 02:33:25 am
content: Thumbs up for anyone who purchased a DS2072 simply because it could be hacked....I just wish they would have made one BW model. Make it the best design you can and dont cripple it! All it does is piss people off.

author: kizzap
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: August 15, 2013, 03:14:41 am
content: Quote from: Sigmoid on August 15, 2013, 02:12:12 am100% what happened in my case, I was lined up to buy a Siglent scope, but this forum and watching reviews made me change my mind.-kizzap

author: ahnuts72
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: August 15, 2013, 04:43:56 am
content: Quote from: Sigmoid on August 15, 2013, 02:30:06 amIt was because the cell providers didnt want people hacking there phones to get things they charge for.Eg. Some companies lock the built in gps so you have to pay for their navigation plan.As far as i can remember the FCC ruled as long as you are not trying to get illegal phone service once you bought it it was yours to do what you wanted to do with it.

author: Sigmoid
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 15, 2013, 05:04:39 am
content: Quote from: leafi on August 15, 2013, 02:33:25 amI see you don't understand them. For them, it's a logical move. If they made only one scope, they could sell it under only one price!Which means either that enterprise customers will only pay $800 (FAIL!), or that HAM enthusiasts and startups short on venture capital won't buy it because it's outside their price range (FAIL!). So, they did what any self-respecting marketing exec would have in their place.

author: ve7xen
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 15, 2013, 06:08:02 am
content: If they were doing it intentionally, I doubt they would've substantially changed the mechanism used in DS1052E. Apparently they were really trying, because they used elliptic curve crypto which is still not all that common among actual security products. It's incredibly hard to do effectively, there were other avenues being explored that wouldn't even have involved the processor / security at all.Anyway Sigmoid's posts make a lot of sense. It would make *sense* for them to make it intentionally easy to hack, or at least not un-hackable, to allow this behaviour. It's clearly not going to poach too many high-paying enterprise customers as these are going to want their warranty intact and guaranteed support, and are still getting a huge deal buying Rigol vs. Tek. If they did the market research I'm sure they'd realize that the people who hack it are the same people who would've just bought the 70MHz scope and been happy, but find the hack a huge selling point, gaining them market share. Of course they probably haven't done so or the hack would've been easier

author: true
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 15, 2013, 06:15:59 am
content: Quote from: RutgerYou do not appear to be qualified to speak on this topic. Your rambling has no relevance whatsoever. /thread

author: mikeselectricstuff
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 15, 2013, 06:44:43 am
content: Although Rigol are amongst the best Chinese manufacturers, I wouldn't credit any Chinese company with the imagination to do anything so subtle, even after the 1052E experience.They are still stupid enough to believe that scrubbing numbers off chips makes sense.

author: Pinkus
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 15, 2013, 08:57:20 am
content: Because the DS2072 seemed to be hackable, I purchased one (even before the hack was there) .... and a then DSA815 .... and then a DG4062. Now all are fully optioned and the DG4062 is running with 200Mhz.I would have not bought any of those without the hackable DS2072.And I am not finished .... I am now thinking of exchanging the DS2072 to a DS4024.......Thumbs up Rigol! At least for convincing me (to purchase three devices) they made the right decision.Peter

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: August 15, 2013, 09:37:07 am
content: Quote from: jasonbrent on August 15, 2013, 01:25:14 amAnd that's the risk most of the companies are now choosing to take.That is their call, and they know the risks that any software upgradable hardware in the hands of the user is hackable.It is not a deliberate ploy on their part, they do not want these things hacked, but the smart ones know it's a drop in the bucket to their regular sales. If anything, it helps sales.The vast majority of the market do not care about hacking their product, nor even know it's possible.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: August 15, 2013, 09:38:09 am
content: Quote from: PeterK13 on August 15, 2013, 08:57:20 amThe 832 PSU will be next I'm sure.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: August 15, 2013, 10:43:54 am
content: Quote from: mojo-chan on August 15, 2013, 10:42:47 amI'm pretty certain it is >99% of sales to people who don't care. Hobbyists are in the noise.

author: dr.diesel
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 15, 2013, 11:03:01 am
content: I have personally bought a holy shit-ton of test equipment for many different corporations. For the most part price is irrelevant, if you need with these options you just buy it, and hacks would never be considered.

author: Orange
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 15, 2013, 12:11:43 pm
content: Quote from: EEVblog on August 15, 2013, 09:37:07 amDave,I think you are underestimating the importance of your EEVblog site. Any hobbyist looks first on the internet before they buy expensive stuff. Google is you friend and points you to EEVblog :-)

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: August 15, 2013, 12:43:23 pm
content: Quote from: Orange on August 15, 2013, 12:11:43 pmNope. Even if I influenced the sale (directly or indirectly) of 10,000 unit (not likely actually), that's still a drop in the bucket.

author: iceisfun
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: August 15, 2013, 10:26:03 pm
content: This rigol hack and the nice intensity graded display pushed me over the edge on the 2072, not that I need >70mhz right now but its interesting to have over built hardware.

author: synapsis
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: August 16, 2013, 12:57:28 am
content: Quote from: PeterK13 on August 15, 2013, 08:57:20 amDid I miss the DG4062 hack?Before I even started coming to the EEVBlog forum, I used Dave's videos for hints on what to look for in equipment to buy. And I wouldn't have even considered Rigol until after I saw mike's teardown. Before that I just thought it was another Chinese POS.

author: SArepairman
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 16, 2013, 02:21:34 am
content: I would have never bought the 1052e if it was not hackable.

author: BillyD
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: August 16, 2013, 10:47:01 am
content: Quote from: true on August 15, 2013, 06:15:59 amAnd your response says a great deal more about your manners, or lack of them. Or lack of debating skills for that matter.

author: eurofox
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: August 16, 2013, 11:36:56 am
content: Quote from: SArepairman on August 16, 2013, 02:21:34 amI have a rule with hacking or copy something:1/ For business and make money I buy it.2/ For hobby and learning no problem, the fact that the spectrum analyzer can be hacked is a motivation for me to buy it even if I don't really need a SA.I got the intention to buy the FR Explorer and now I start maybe to change my mind. I'm a "digital dude" not an "RF dude" but now more and more we have to deal with RF.Eurofox

author: crt
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: August 16, 2013, 01:03:42 pm
content: Quote from: PeterK13 on August 15, 2013, 08:57:20 amat 200MHz ?i thought the higher version DG4000 series only up to 160MHz

author: true
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 16, 2013, 01:24:44 pm
content: Quote from: BillyD on August 16, 2013, 10:47:01 amOf which I am glad. And there is nothing to debate.

author: Rutger
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: August 16, 2013, 05:43:14 pm
content: Quote from: mojo-chan on August 16, 2013, 01:29:02 pmYes, that is a good question, how many units did Rigol sell of the DS1052E, does anyone know? I think 10K units at $ 800 each is no drop in the bucket at all. BTW the 70MHz version is currently out of stock at the Rigol website, while the 100/200 MHz version are in stock. I guess it is selling like hot cakes. Rigol is busy downgrading the 200MHz units so they can sell them as 70Mhz versions...

author: Mr Simpleton
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: August 16, 2013, 06:04:41 pm
content: Maybe the shortage is linked to h/w rev 2?? Maybe they about to crank out a new DS2070A which will offer the "hidden" features (i.e. 50 ohm) but at a slight increase of price? They just need to get rid of the old stock no-one will buy

author: synapsis
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: August 16, 2013, 06:44:00 pm
content: Rigol had stock issues on the DS2072 before the hack.

author: casper.bang
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 16, 2013, 06:49:06 pm
content: As a price oriented amateur I had put the DS2072 off my radar in spite of Dave's recommendation, but I have to admit these hacks have put it firmly back. It's still a lot of money, but protocol decoding and deeeep memory makes it impossible to ignore as a hobbyist. Like others, I also don't think these hacks will pose a serious risk to Rigol's sale of higher-end stuff, as companies (the ones I know anyway) usually just pay whatever it cost.

author: cosmos
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: August 16, 2013, 07:11:48 pm
content: Some of us might even recommend Rigol for our workplaces once we get to see that it is as good as or better than the traditional brands.

author: tom66
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 16, 2013, 07:20:31 pm
content: Aside from the odd software bug, IMO, Rigol instruments are built almost as well as Agilent, and better than Tek.

author: Rutger
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: August 17, 2013, 07:01:54 pm
content: Quote from: mikeselectricstuff on August 15, 2013, 06:44:43 amYes Mike, I think I give them more credit than is due. I think you are right, but still think it will actually benefit Rigol, the credit should to the people that hacked the unit(s). They should really outsource the QA to an actual native English speaking person and an Engineering degree, to prevent the poor English in the firmware & manuals.I used to work as an localization engineer and some Chinese companies were smart enough to use us, their English was terrible.

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 17, 2013, 08:16:38 pm
content: Quote from: tom66 on August 16, 2013, 07:20:31 pmBut the after sale support is poornow.They should improve.

author: Chalky
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: August 17, 2013, 09:34:06 pm
content: Per original question, piracy. Disregarding semantics, getting a vendor's offering for free, that otherwise comes at a price...through sneaky means...some reverse engineering...can't see how you would defend the legality of that. Keen to hear opposing opinions.

author: Corporate666
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: August 17, 2013, 10:13:26 pm
content: Quote from: Chalky on August 17, 2013, 09:34:06 pmThe flip side of that is I own the hardware, and I can do whatever I want with it. Would it be legal for me to write my own firmware and completely replace all the Rigol code in the unit? Sure... I own it, I can do whatever I want with it. I believe the prior poster was correct in that it is established legal precedent that you cannot sell something to someone and claim to retain ownership of it also. Buying a piece of hardware and not being allowed to use some parts of it is like buying a house and having one door nailed shut. Sure, you can pay the original seller to come and unblock the door for you if you want to.... but you own the house, so if you choose to do it yourself or have someone else do it, you can do that too - because you own it and can do whatever you like with it.

author: ataradov
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 18, 2013, 03:31:56 am
content: Quote from: Corporate666 on August 17, 2013, 10:13:26 pmIf you rewrite it, then yes, it is legal. But using illegally obtained keys and software is illegal.Applying the same logic, I paid for my PC, so now I can go and download pirated Photoshop. I could write it myself, of course.

author: Fsck
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 18, 2013, 03:37:56 am
content: Quote from: ataradov on August 18, 2013, 03:31:56 amyour logic is flawed. the same logic would be using hacked firmware on your PC.Rigol produces both hardware and software. Adobe produces software.

author: ataradov
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 18, 2013, 03:40:34 am
content: Apple makes both software and hardware, so it is OK for me to steal MAC OSX? I mean, I bought the hardware and how dare they come up with the new software and charge for it.

author: Corporate666
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: August 18, 2013, 04:03:19 am
content: Quote from: ataradov on August 18, 2013, 03:31:56 amThat's not the same logic. The same logic would be to disable the speed limiter on your car, for example. The law in the USA that I believe covers this is the DCMA. It's a bit fuzzy when it comes to hardware locks... but this topic has been debated to death on the CNC machining forums where there are access codes that open up features included in the machine, like more memory, faster processing, etc. The folks who write software think everything is (or should be illegal). The users tend to think everything should be legal. I am not aware of any legal cases that test these exact situations, just tangentially related ones - and I am not convinced one would be successful in the USA if brought. Keep in mind it depends on the country as well... laws in USA will be different than those in Oz.I find it amusing that the Chinese have such wanton disregard for copyright and patent law, and I bet Rigol aren't too happy about their products being hacked

author: Fsck
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 18, 2013, 04:50:44 am
content: Quote from: ataradov on August 18, 2013, 03:40:34 amStill not equivalent. You're not "stealing" anything with Rigol's DS2000. You're using THE SAME SOFTWARE, with some minor alterations.If Apple sold a base OS, with features like networking, USB access, displayport access, hdmi access, etc with the hardware installed but disabled in software and you did a software hack to enable it: then it would be equivalent.The closest Apple comparison (still ridiculously unequivocal) would be to free a locked iPhone from a provider.

author: Psi
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 18, 2013, 05:08:36 am
content: When it comes to hacker prevention companies would be far better off making hacking incredibly annoying rather than simply trying to make it 100% impossible. When trying to make something impossible (encryption) it only takes one little mistake in the implementation and it's worthless.Where as making something that's infuriatingly annoying is quite easy and makes people want to give up hacking it.For example, they could design into a product 50 completely different ways the firmware can detect if it has been hacked.Then code the firmware to appear like the hack has worked for a little while.Make each of the 50 detection methods wait a different length of time before intentionally failing, throwing errors or self bricking the unit.Something like that would drive a hacker mad.Every time you think you've won it breaks a few days/weeks later.Luckily companies don't do that, they spend millions trying to encrypt everything and then fail anyway.

author: ataradov
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 18, 2013, 05:33:45 am
content: Quote from: Psi on August 18, 2013, 05:08:36 amThey could easily make it show incorrect waveforms and values if hack is detected. The only reason they don't is that there will be some idiot who will performs some critical measurement using this hacked equipment and something bad will happen as a result. Investigation eventually will lead to Rigol and that would be a brand reputation damage.There was one Russian company that did this for a very famous and widely pirated accounting software - it was just silently screwing up numbers if stolen copy was detected. They've got sued after one company's accounting was irreversibly destroyed. I don't know how it all turned out, but it was not pretty. Although I really like this sort of protection and hope companies use it more.

author: Psi
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 18, 2013, 05:40:37 am
content: Yep, screwing up readings is a bad idea. Crashing and generally 'not working' is far safer.

author: Carrington
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 23, 2013, 04:19:55 pm
content: "Now here's the weird thing... the values they used are suspiciously similar to a crackme on the net."http://poke152.blogspot.com.es/2013/07/riglol.html

author: FrankBuss
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: August 23, 2013, 05:15:55 pm
content: Quote from: Fsck on August 18, 2013, 04:50:44 amWhat about downloading a free evaluation version of a software, which is limited to maybe 30 days (like AutoCAD, which has a 30 day trial version, and after this it costs $7,600)? Just a minor alteration, I'm using THE SAME SOFTWARE, and then I can use it legally forever for free?

author: Lightages
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: August 23, 2013, 05:35:10 pm
content: Is this different than changing some parts in a piece of equipment to enable a function or better performance? No. The equipment, in this case, has the capability built in and is being enabled by modifying something.Is downloading a software product without paying different? Yes. In the case of Adobe, their products are software and you can't receive a copy of their software legally without paying first or agreeing to certain terms before downloading or installing their software.Are there grey areas? Yes. For example one could argue that the price of these scopes are this low and of benefit to the customer to have them built this way. To need to build each model of scope to be what it is and no more capability that could be software hacked in would cost much more and therefore each model would cost more. So for me the potential of doing these kinds of hacks is that it could drive up the costs again. I personally doubt it.IMHO, this software modifying of a piece of equipment is no different than hardware hacking a piece of equipment. The method has changed but the legality and even the morality have not. As I had posted before in another thread on this type of subject, I have done mods on hardware in the past. One example was a Hitachi tape deck that I had and another lower model a friend had. When we compared the schematics, his circuit was essentially the same as mine, except his had extra capacitors across the input and outputs. Once we cut these out his tape deck had the same frequency response. So in this case the manufacturer had added parts to degrade the performance at extra cost! Argue if you want that we were doing something immoral, but it certainly was not illegal and I would say well within our rights.The modification of a few bits to enable the full capabilities of a Rigol scope is no different. The method has changed, that is all. They tried to obfuscate the method, so what?

author: c4757p
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 23, 2013, 05:49:13 pm
content: As far as I'm concerned, the locked-room analogy works just fine here. If I buy a house and one of the rooms is locked, and I didn't get the key, I can remove the doorknob or take the door down to get in. Yes, even if I knew I wouldn't get the key before I bought the house. It's mine now, you don't get to retain ownership of one sliver of my house, or of my oscilloscope. You want to give it to me on a lease, like a software trial period? Fine, we'll play by your terms. But if it's apurchase, then I get ownership of every atom in the device, and you can cry about it all you want.

author: Carrington
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 23, 2013, 06:19:08 pm
content: The topic is: piracy or an smart marketing ploy by Rygol?IMHO smart marketing.

author: Corporate666
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: August 23, 2013, 06:20:11 pm
content: Quote from: ataradov on August 18, 2013, 05:33:45 amThat sort of copy protection is a really really bad idea. Being wronged does not grant someone the legal right to then wrong someone else in return. Revenge is not something codified in law - well maybe Sharia law, but is Sharia law a good foundation for first world software development ethics? Anyway, I digress.If someone puts a dent in your car door in a parking lot, you don't have the right (legal or moral) to take out a baseball bat and destroy their car. If someone punches your wife, you don't have the right to shoot them in the face, etc. If you do so, while your motivation might be mitigated somewhat in a legal sense, but your liability won't be. Corporations exist to turn a profit. Willfully engaging in illegal acts which pile on huge amounts of liability to the company is about the biggest breach of fiduciary duty I can think of! It would be like the corporate executives having a mandatory amateur stripper night that all female employees are required to perform in.I'd be running for the hills from that company

author: ElectroIrradiator
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 23, 2013, 06:26:09 pm
content: The legal precedent within the EU on issues like this is pretty clear: We are *explicitly* allowed to do anything to any electronic device we own. If we can improve performance of a car or a DSO, through reverse engineering, cleverly guessing manufacturer's 'sekrit' software keys or whatever, then that is perfectly fine. We bought the item in the condition the manufacturer intended to deliver it to us, it is ours to do with as we please.There are two potential issues, none of which affects the legality of a 'crack': The manufacturer's warranty and whether it still holds on a modified device (I'm not sure). Additionally we obviously aren't allowed to distribute copies of the on-board *software* / firmware, to which the manufacturer still retains copyright (we just bought perpetual rights to use one copy of said software on our kit).Note that it is also explicitly allowed to publicly talk about and openly discuss how to modify electronics, including distributing any required software tools we have authored ourselves.To put it differently: It would be very difficult to service and maintain many types of electronics, including old legacy manufacturing equipment, if 'cracking' and modification wasn't allowed.

author: FrankBuss
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: August 23, 2013, 06:43:08 pm
content: Quote from: Lightages on August 23, 2013, 05:35:10 pmSome companies might disagree. A similar case is the PS3 jailbreak. Sony claimed violations of 8 laws:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_Computer_Entertainment_America_v._George_HotzThey settled it out of court, maybe because it was more important for Sony that the hacker doesn't hack Sony devices anymore, because this was the requirement for the settlement, but I'm sure Sony would have won.

author: ElectroIrradiator
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 23, 2013, 06:51:38 pm
content: Quote from: FrankBuss on August 23, 2013, 06:43:08 pmThat was in the US. Stunts like that wouldn't stick within the EU (with the possible exceptions of the UK and Ireland due to differences in their legal systems, compared to the rest of the EU).

author: Lightages
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: August 23, 2013, 08:31:02 pm
content: Quote from: FrankBuss on August 23, 2013, 06:43:08 pmReally? C'mon... Corporations are out to make money, nothing less and not to be fair or good citizens. Their goal is to bring in as much money as possible and they will change the laws with bribes, lobbying, and threats. Sorry, but I could care less what a corporation wants. They are evil zombies walking the earth and destroying it and the rights of individuals with the greed.

author: Lightages
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: August 23, 2013, 08:33:54 pm
content: Oh yes. I think the hack is not piracy nor smart marketing. It was unintentional marketing. These mistakes have probably raised the sales of their products and raised the awareness of potential customers of their brand. The bigger mistake would be to try and shut the hak down now.Edited to correct the first sentence.

author: Corporate666
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: August 23, 2013, 10:48:50 pm
content: Quote from: Lightages on August 23, 2013, 08:31:02 pmThat's a very jaded and completely incorrect view on things.

author: Lightages
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: August 23, 2013, 11:08:10 pm
content: Quote from: Corporate666 on August 23, 2013, 10:48:50 pmI am not sure that I should trust someone named "Corporate666" to have a unbiased opinion on my assertion

author: dr.diesel
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 23, 2013, 11:17:56 pm
content: Quote from: Corporate666 on August 23, 2013, 10:48:50 pmI have worked at three fortune 500 companies in my career, each of them resemble (don't know that I'd put it quite that harsh) the above.During a Christmas party I've seen a plant (huge electronics manufacturer) manager get up and say; "Each and everyone of you are instantly replaceable, don't forget it".I've seen falsified documents, direct lies, scams at the director level and more. I left management and ultimately working for someone else because of the horrible childish behaviour of corporate America. I am now in charge of myself, treat people how I'd like to be treated, wake up and go to bed happy, each day.

author: Carrington
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 23, 2013, 11:37:06 pm
content: Quote from: dr.diesel on August 23, 2013, 11:17:56 pmI imagine that unfortunately be so everywhere.

author: Corporate666
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: August 24, 2013, 12:34:12 am
content: Quote from: Lightages on August 23, 2013, 11:08:10 pmYou don't have to trust my viewpoint - whenever someone makes a blanket statement that "all <insert thing> are evil and the worst things ever", you know that is someone you can safely ignore.

author: Corporate666
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: August 24, 2013, 12:39:22 am
content: Quote from: dr.diesel on August 23, 2013, 11:17:56 pmYou've convinced me. The anecdote about the manager proves that what the guy said - the corporations are evil zombies who are destroying the world and the rights of individuals - is true.How can we put Dave out of business for his part in this? And what about all the other business owners on here - that includes you, you evil zombie right-crushing bastard. All those nasty evil corporations need to be disposed of. (presumably that's what is holding the little guy back from making it big - not lack of effort or lack of commitment, but it's those evil corporations, I tells ya!)Now, let's guess at who gives more to charity - big corporations or the sold props

author: dr.diesel
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 24, 2013, 12:45:57 am
content: Quote from: Corporate666 on August 24, 2013, 12:39:22 amWhatever fake action lets you sleep at night.

author: Lightages
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: August 24, 2013, 02:13:07 am
content: Quote from: Corporate666 on August 24, 2013, 12:34:12 amNow now, I never said they are the worst things ever, I reserve that classification for religion.And yes you are correct. I should have at least qualified it a bit by saying all publicly traded corporations and those that have shareholders beyond the immediate owners are evil zombies ruining the world and the rights of individuals. There might be some exceptions to this but they would be as rare as an honest politician.Rigol is out to make money and their reason for doing anything is to make money. Their products are competitive and even more so sometimes when their products get hacked. They would be crazy to stop them once they are out of the gate. They did not let these hacks get out on purpose but everyone has to weigh the cost of doing anything either way to prevent them.

author: Corporate666
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: August 24, 2013, 03:34:53 am
content: Quote from: dr.diesel on August 24, 2013, 12:45:57 amFake action.... interesting. So the checks bounce, or what?

author: Corporate666
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: August 24, 2013, 03:46:53 am
content: Quote from: Lightages on August 24, 2013, 02:13:07 amAgree with you on religion.But the "public companies are evil" is really no different than other unsubstantiated conspiracy theories... like the illuminati controlling the world (substitute Bilderbergs, Freemasons, etc), or 9/11 was an inside job, or the military industrial complex are the true rulers and choose which politicians get into office, or that humans are thetans who have lost the way of Xenu, or that the medical industry is designed to keep you sick (and a customer).The proof that these companies don't run things is proven by two simple words... Bear Stearns. Or another couple - Bernie Madoff. I know a local guy who is the CEO of a publicly traded Fortune 1000 company - guy is extremely wealthy, real smart, real motivated. He has no special power and actually get shit on by the government infinitely more than the regular citizen. I can say the same about myself (getting shit on by the government).My personal observation and firm belief is that "big corporate" stuff (or big secret society, big oil, big banks) really holds those who believe it back - same as the folks who chase alternative medicine crap.It's a big world out there - there are public companies that behave badly and others that behave like angels. There are private companies that behave badly, and other that behave like angels. But it's hard to be a big and public company and get away with too much - you always have someone looking over your shoulder and countless people nipping at your heels.To each their own I guess.As for Rigol, I agree with you that they are in a great position having hackable scopes that generally only the individual will hack... but I also bet they don't see it that way and I bet they will go even further in the future to prevent such hacking. Don't see them as being evil though - they are just a bunch of people making stuff that people want to buy. Ain't capitalism great?

author: Neganur
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: August 26, 2013, 01:30:41 pm
content: Quote from: Corporate666 on August 24, 2013, 12:34:12 amJust pointing out that you just gave such a blanket statement yourself.

author: danb35
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: August 27, 2013, 09:44:07 pm
content: The thread subject is a complicated question, more so because the options are not mutually exclusive (i.e., it could be both piracy and a smart marketing ploy). It's further complicated by the fact that the meaning of "piracy" is somewhat vague--it's obvious that nobody's boarding ships flying the Jolly Roger, which would be the literal meaning--and that laws vary from country to country.So first, a few things that the hack clearly isn't. It clearly isn't theft--no physical object is being taken from Rigol without their consent. Therefore, not theft, full stop. It equally clearly isn't copyright infringement in the traditional sense, as nothing is being copied--the firmware is all there on the scope already. We're copying the private key, but that isn't copyrightable anyway (there's no creative expression in that number), so no infringement there. We aren't copying the license keys, and even if we were they also wouldn't be copyrightable.There's a long history of hardware hacking to increase the capabilities of the hardware, sometimes with the knowledge of the manufacturer and sometimes without. I've been a ham for nearly 20 years, and it's extremely common in that community, and it seems pretty common elsewhere. It's never been considered piracy, or in any other way ethically questionable, to mod your hardware to make it more capable--doesn't matter if the mod is as simple as adding or removing a jumper wire, or as complex as adding entirely new circuitry. It also doesn't matter if the additional capability is something that the manufacturer sells either in a different model, or as an upgrade to the existing device.If there's a legal problem in the US, it's going to be with the DMCA. One of its provisions is that it prohibits circumventing technical measures that control access to a copyrighted work (such as the firmware in the scope). There's a good chance that this prohibition could apply here (I don't know if it's settled law that controlling access toa portionof a copyrighted work--e.g., to specific features--would be a "technical measure" in this context, but it seems like a safe bet that it would). Of course, for those outside the USA, the DMCA doesn't apply.So--is a possible DMCA violation, which does not involve taking anything from Rigol, nor copying anything from Rigol, piracy? I tend to think not, but the term itself is vague enough to make the question ultimately un-answerable.

author: ivan747
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 28, 2013, 11:51:20 pm
content: Quote from: ataradov on August 18, 2013, 03:40:34 amA more equivalent case that you can apply to this discussion would be buying OS X in a flash drive (they are selling it like this now) and changing the part of the program that checks if you are using a Mac so that you can install in on a PC.

author: ivan747
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 28, 2013, 11:54:23 pm
content: The problem here is of course, that you are contractually bound to the software vendor because of the End User License Agreement. If Apple states you cannot alter the binaries, then you cannot do it legally, as you would be violating the civil law or the contractual law. The same could happen if Rigol decided to do the same.The problem for Apple or Rigol is that the only entity that is going to prosecute violators is themselves, and that is expensive.

author: Corporate666
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: August 28, 2013, 11:56:32 pm
content: Quote from: Neganur on August 26, 2013, 01:30:41 pmIf you want to get *that* exact over wording, you'll notice I never said all blanket statements are bad. I said that specific types of blanket statements categorizing whole swaths of things as being evil and the worst things ever are things said by people you can safely ignore.

author: danb35
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: August 29, 2013, 10:42:06 am
content: Quote from: ivan747 on August 28, 2013, 11:54:23 pmSince I don't have my DS2072 yet, I have to ask--how is the EULA presented? Is it a click-through when you first power-up the scope? It isn't in the manual.

author: kizzap
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: August 29, 2013, 12:21:06 pm
content: Quote from: danb35 on August 29, 2013, 10:42:06 amThere isn't one on the scope-kizzap

author: ElectroIrradiator
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 29, 2013, 12:47:35 pm
content: Quote from: ivan747 on August 28, 2013, 11:54:23 pmThis hugely depends on which country we are talking about. EULAs - printed, click-through or otherwise - are*completely*unenforceable here in Denmark. We have a law making any contract, which violates some basic rights, absolutely null and void. One of these rights - yet by far not all of them - is that a lawful contract must have the written signature of both parties to a deal. No signatures -> not a contract, in which case any question of right and wrong defaults to basic consumer protection laws, fair use laws etc.Even Microsoft and Apple cannot make their EULAs stick in court here. They will back down on any of their hilariously misguided claims, once they realize you know what you are talking about.Not allowed to modify binaries?!Disclaimer: I have been involved in kind of a minor legal shuffle with/against Apple through their local representatives, a local Danish retail chain. This case was in part due to Apple trying to enforce one of their EULAs against me. In the end Apple (wisely) decided they didn't want a Danish court to rule on the case, and decided to settle with me.

author: riconette
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: August 29, 2013, 05:58:58 pm
content: Quote from: iceisfun on August 15, 2013, 10:26:03 pmi second that.i wouldn't have bought the 2072 if it wasn't hackable. so rigol had the option to not earn a single penny from me or sell me a 2072.

author: danb35
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: September 14, 2013, 11:49:45 am
content: Quote from: danb35 on August 29, 2013, 10:42:06 amHaving now received my scope, I concur with kizzap--there's no EULA going on. Nothing comes up on the scope itself, there's nothing in the manual, there's no separate sheet of paper, there's no seal (or printed text) on the box mentioning agreement to an EULA. So, modding the scope is not going to violate anything I've "agreed" to.

author: Rory
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: September 15, 2013, 02:10:21 am
content: So, I'm thinking the worst they can do is remove the lkeys that weren't purchased.

author: Chalky
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: September 20, 2013, 10:47:58 pm
content: What about morality? (I realise this is not an electronics question!)

author: kizzap
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: September 20, 2013, 11:53:34 pm
content: Quote from: Chalky on September 20, 2013, 10:47:58 pmMorality went out the door with Religion-kizzap

author: mamalala
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: September 21, 2013, 06:30:33 am
content: Quote from: ivan747 on August 28, 2013, 11:54:23 pmYou'd be surprised what the actual legal possibilities are in different jurisdications.For example, here in Germany every shrink-wrap license is void. Same applies to any EULA or other stuff that one is not told about at the time & point of sale. Plus, the contract one legally enters into would be between the seller and the buyer, the software manufacturer has little say in that (unless the manufacturer is also the seller to that buyer, of course). The SW manufacturer can enter a contract with a seller, of course. But that contract does in no way automatically extends to the finaly buyer.Here, a potential buyer must be informed about any restrictions or other stuff that ought to be some form of contract, at the point of sale. Any regulations that the buyer was not made aware of at that time are void, simple as that.There are a bunch of other neat regulations in the EU in general. For example, you are allowed to circumvent any copy protection scheme for your personal use, especially if such a scheme causes any trouble for the intended operation.Greetings,ChrisEdit: Oh, and even if the terms, conditions, license, whatever is presented to you at the time & point of sale, that does not mean that everything in there is legally valid either. All those clauses have to obey the legal framework they operate in.

author: Whuffo
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: September 21, 2013, 02:54:10 pm
content: Quote from: Chalky on September 20, 2013, 10:47:58 pmIt's a great question. Rigol actually makes one version of DS2000 hardware; they're all the same. Then, by flipping a configuration bit or two in the firmware, they degrade the performance of some of these products and sell these degraded versions at a substantially lower price.Consider: the incremental costs of these multiple versions is close to zero; a couple of stickers is about it. They're happy to sell this item at the low (degraded) price and make a good profit doing so. What makes the "upper" versions more valuable; why do they charge so much more for the exact same hardware and firmware with a configuration bit flipped? Where's the morality here?People who "hack" these scopes aren't pirating anything; they haven't changed the hardware or altered firmware in any way. All they're doing is flipping those configuration bits and using the hardware at its design spec. Corporations like Rigol know this; they're not going to bother with EULAs or license agreements because they know that they aren't going to try to enforce any questionable legal theory against an owner of one of their products.Even if they did want to - how would they ever know that you'd "hacked" their product? And how would they justify charging different people different prices for the exact same hardware and firmware?

author: TomThomas
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: September 23, 2013, 01:15:43 pm
content: Quote from: Whuffo on September 21, 2013, 02:54:10 pmJust a short comment on this:Rigol is not the only oscilloscope manufactorer who acts like that. All others do it in the same way! And they even charge more for the scopes than Rigol.

author: Whuffo
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: September 23, 2013, 10:35:03 pm
content: Quote from: TomThomas on September 23, 2013, 01:15:43 pmRight! It's a common scam these days - actually, it's been going on for a long, long time. Artificial distinctions to create a larger market from one design; I remember way back when I was buying a CD player for the home stereo. Money was tight, and the base unit came in two models; one with remote control and one without. The price difference was significant; $100 without, $170 with. The actual difference? The more expensive model came with a cheap remote packed in the box. There was absolutely no difference in the CD player and the no remote version worked fine with a remote. It was a Sony.Did I feel like I was getting away with something by using a universal remote with my "no remote" player? Nope, just using the functionality that was provided in the hardware.I'm in the market for a new O-scope these days. 100MHz dual channel is good enough; should I get a 1052E and hack it? Or should I check the prices first and buy the 1102E for $19 less? It's always a good idea to understand what you're buying and do a little research first. Those who just walk into the electronic emporium and ask the salesman to show them the right one get fleeced every time.

author: hammy
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: September 24, 2013, 08:09:31 am
content: Quote from: mojo-chan on September 24, 2013, 07:45:29 amThat's a myth, isn't it? That's marketing, they tell you something like this and there are always people who belief in this "calibration" story.The same story they told us years ago with floppy disks. The double sided and single sided floppies. Called HD and DD. They had told us this story for the 8", for the 5 1/4" and for the 3,5" floppies.The same story they told us with 486 cpu. The DX with coprocessor and the SX "without" coprocessor. But they where the same cpu's. Only the SX had a deactivated coprocessor, at first after production they burned a bridge inside.You need more examples?

author: Teneyes
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: September 24, 2013, 07:10:15 pm
content: Quote from: Hydrawerk on August 17, 2013, 08:16:38 pm@HydrawerkI disagree,I got an RMA and free shipping label from RigolNA on the same day I reported my problem.With Fedex tracking I saw my DS2072 delivery to Rigol Wednesday evening and it shipped back to me on Friday morning!!!,I cannot ask for more than that!

author: Whuffo
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: September 24, 2013, 09:07:46 pm
content: Quote from: mojo-chan on September 24, 2013, 07:45:29 amThat would require each device to be fully tested - and the ones that fail would then be fully tested at a lower frequency. That takes too much labor and isnotdone. What is done in the real world is each production batch is sampled, the samples are tested for spec, and the whole batch is passed / failed based on the sample performance. Errors in individual units are reasonably rare, and are most economically dealt with in the field under warranty. Units are labeled / serialized / configured at the end of the line to meet the demand for different models and boxed / shipped.Companies like Rigol are especially bad for pulling this scam. You can buy the bronze, silver, or gold level units but they all come out of the same bin and cost the same to produce. If this presto-chango was happening at the retail store you'd be screaming, but when it's done at the factory somehow people think it's OK.

author: wraper
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: September 25, 2013, 12:24:32 pm
content: Quote from: mojo-chan on September 24, 2013, 01:04:32 pmThis is only partially true. Some amount of GPUs and CPUs are disabled because of the real defect but they also cripple a lot of good chips only to fulfill a demand of cheaper ones. So unlocking (when possible) experience can vary a lot.

author: neggles
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: September 25, 2013, 04:19:56 pm
content: Quote from: wraper on September 25, 2013, 12:24:32 pmReminds me a bit of the early Playstation 3s (pre-slim, never mind super-slim) - the Cell processor with its 7 SPEs (cores, pretty much) was so complex and made using such a new fab technology that the majority of the chips were coming out of fab with a dead SPE - so they added an extra SPE to the design and lasered off the connections to the dead ones, thus massively increasing their total chip yield (i've heard at some points with the original design the yield was as bad as 10-15% functional chips)So yeah, sometimes there's actual reasons they've shut off these extra bits, be it failure to achieve a certain bandwidth or whatever - but given the demonstrable lack of internal hardware differences (maybe some resistors) on the lower-end models of most hackable scopes (rigol, hantek, etc etc) and demonstrated functionality of the hacked scopes, it doesn't seem likely to be the case here.