New version of DRM removal tools ("DeDRM")

[Katsunami]

Originally Posted by pdurrant

I haven't looked at the obok plugin or the Other Tools folder, but I now have done a per-file and pe-change compare of the three main DeDRM solutions. 6.2.0 looks like minor (but useful) tweaks to 6.1.0. The biggest new thing seems to be an ignoblekey.py script that retrives the B&N key from log files, and the changes to the tools to automatically call it when necessary.

Still, we now have two different versions of these tools; Alf's official 6.1.0, and this unofficial (?) version 6.2.0. There's a chance that Alf will also create a version 6.2.0, but make different changes, and then it will become very confusing.

I wonder if I'd be better off following this new version, or keep to the old ones on Alf's blog.

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by Katsunami

There's a chance that Alf will also create a version 6.2.0, but make different changes, and then it will become very confusing.

I wonder if I'd be better off following this new version, or keep to the old ones on Alf's blog.

Makes no forking difference to me.

[lkmiller]

Originally Posted by Katsunami

Still, we now have two different versions of these tools; Alf's official 6.1.0, and this unofficial (?) version 6.2.0. There's a chance that Alf will also create a version 6.2.0, but make different changes, and then it will become very confusing.

I wonder if I'd be better off following this new version, or keep to the old ones on Alf's blog.

I think that Alf and Harper will soon get together on this. Either Harper's v6.2.0 will become official or a Alf/Harper v6.2.1 (or whatever) will get posted to the blog. No reason to discard or duplicate what, by all accounts, sound like useful and well done improvements.

[eschwartz]

In the spirit of Alf, contributed improvements become part of the tools.

[zebradude]

Originally Posted by alansplace

...it seems a bit odd that it's 1/3 the size of the preceeding version?!?

WOW the file size number of the new version is the sign of the Devil

666

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by zebradude

WOW the file size number of the new version is the sign of the Devil

666

Not any longer. The new 6.2.0 ZIP file has been replaced with a proper ZIP file containing ALL the tools.

[Katsunami]

Originally Posted by eschwartz

In the spirit of Alf, contributed improvements become part of the tools.

Yes of course, but it would be nice if there is only one official version.

Also, not everybody is able to check the source code for... uh... unwanted additions when using non-Alf versions.

[eschwartz]

That is why I would wait until the version in the comments is linked to or re-uploaded by Alf. I do expect though, that it will be.

[odamizu]

Apprentice Harper's GitHub page shows 3 contributers: apprenticealf, pdurrant and apprenticeharper. This gives the impression that he has been working with them, but comments on MobileRead suggest he is not??

https://github.com/apprenticeharper/...s/contributors

[Katsunami]

ApprenticeHarper has probably forked some repository on GitHub or somewhere else. That would explain the contributions.

[pdurrant]

Originally Posted by odamizu

Apprentice Harper's GitHub page shows 3 contributers: apprenticealf, pdurrant and apprenticeharper. This gives the impression that he has been working with them, but comments on MobileRead suggest he is not??

https://github.com/apprenticeharper/...s/contributors

I can speak with some authority that it's not necessary to be part of a github team to be credited with contributions. Apprentice Harper seems to have given me credit for the changes I made to MobiDeDRM back in 2008/2009, and since he's used my email address in the commits, and I have a github account, I'm listed as a contributor.

It seems that Apprentice Alf has a github account too, although it doesn't look like it's been used very much.

So at least Apprentice Harper is giving credit where it's due. Although I'm a little embarrassed to find my small contributions giving me a prominent place in the contributors list!

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by odamizu

Apprentice Harper's GitHub page shows 3 contributers: apprenticealf, pdurrant and apprenticeharper. This gives the impression that he has been working with them, but comments on MobileRead suggest he is not??

https://github.com/apprenticeharper/...s/contributors

All that means is that there were some email addresses in the commit messages that align with git accounts. It doesn't mean that any one was/is working WITH apprentice Harper ... it only means that apprenticeharper retroactively entered commits on behalf of someone. Unless we believe apprenticeharper has been secretly working on this repository since 2008 (or earlier).

Go to those contributors' github pages and see if it shows that they've contributed to apprenticeharper's repository.

I'm not saying there's any foul-play going on or anything (I don't believe there is), it's just that seeing some familiar names in the contributors list on github does not equal collaborration with apprenticeharper.

Oops! pdurrant beat me!

[CRussel]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

The 6.2.0 "release" appears to be the plugin source and the plugin zip only. Nothing else is included. There's at least one file there that appears to not belong to the plugin, but it doesn't look particularly harmful. Just maybe a little careless?

Not sure what to think, really.

EDIT: seems you have to download from the Source Code link to get the full tools package.

Little odd that nothing is mentioned on Alf's site other than in the comments section, but it could be legit, I guess.

Originally Posted by HarryT

Is this really an official release?

I'll believe it's an official release when Paul says it is.

That being said, if you're having Kobo or other ePub and PDF issues, this release may be helpful. I don't see anything in it for Kindle users.

[eschwartz]

Yep, GitHub contributor matching is well-known for not being a proof to anything. It is simply a handy way to see what is being claimed.

You want proof, look for commits signed with a GPG key, but you usually won't find those outside high-profile repositories. e.g. The linux kernel has signed commits/tags.

Apprenticealf seemingly has a GitHub account, and used it to create an empty repo.

[SensualPoet]

I am having trouble with 6.1.0 and the keygen for Nook. Two very recent purchases won't unlock yet the current key (and a regenerated key just in case) unlocks older downloaded locked files. No changes to credit card or account name. ignoblekeygen.pyw just comes up "failed" and the Nook PC epubs won't open in Adobe reader asking for unlock code.

Ahhh, ok. I see there is a new strategy to get the keygen that skips user name / credit card info, as per Alf's blog user comments. That worked based on some Jan 10 commentary.