Protection against Hacking Clause Samples
The 'Protection against Hacking' clause establishes measures and responsibilities to safeguard systems, data, or services from unauthorized access or cyberattacks. It typically outlines the security protocols that must be implemented, such as firewalls, encryption, or regular security audits, and may assign liability in the event of a breach. This clause's core function is to mitigate the risk of hacking incidents, ensuring both parties are aware of their obligations to maintain cybersecurity and clarifying accountability if a security compromise occurs.
POPULAR SAMPLE Copied 1 times
Protection against Hacking. Playback licenses, revocation certificates and security-critical data shall use commercially reasonable cryptographic protection methods to deter against tampering, forging, and spoofing. The content protection system shall employ industry accepted tamper-resistant technology on hardware and software components (e.g., to deter such hacks as a clock rollback, spoofing, use of common debugging tools, and intercepting unencrypted content in memory buffers). For software-only implementations on open computing platforms (e.g., personal computers), the content protection system shall employ tamper resistant software. Examples of tamper resistant software techniques include:
(a) Code obfuscation example: The executable binary dynamically encrypts and decrypts itself in memory, so that the algorithm is not unnecessarily exposed to disassembly or reverse engineering.
Protection against Hacking. 3.7.1. Playback licenses, revocation certificates, and security-critical data shall be cryptographically protected against tampering, forging, and spoofing.
3.7.2. The Content Protection System shall employ industry accepted tamper-resistant technology on hardware and software components (e.g., technology to prevent such hacks as a clock rollback, spoofing, use of common debugging tools, and intercepting unencrypted content in memory buffers). Examples of techniques included in tamper-resistant technology are:
3.7.2.1. Code and data obfuscation: The executable binary dynamically encrypts and decrypts itself in memory so that the algorithm is not unnecessarily exposed to disassembly or reverse engineering.
Protection against Hacking. Playback licenses, revocation certificates, and security-critical data shall be cryptographically protected against tampering, forging, and spoofing. The content protection system shall employ industry accepted tamper-resistant technology on hardware and software components (e.g., to prevent such hacks as a clock rollback, spoofing, use of common debugging tools, and intercepting unencrypted content in memory buffers). The content protection system shall implement secure internal data channels to prevent rogue processes from intercepting data transmitted between system processes. The content protection system shall prevent the use of media player filters or plug-ins that can be exploited to gain unauthorized access to content (e.g.: access to the decrypted but still encoded content by inserting a shim between the DRM and the player).
Protection against Hacking. Playback licenses, revocation certificates, and security-critical data shall be cryptographically protected against tampering, forging, and spoofing. The content protection system shall employ industry accepted tamper-resistant technology on hardware and software components (e.g., to prevent such hacks as a clock rollback, spoofing, use of common debugging tools, and intercepting unencrypted content in memory buffers). For software-only implementations on open computing platforms (e.g., personal computers), the content protection system shall employ tamper resistant software. Examples of tamper resistant software techniques include: Code obfuscation example: The executable binary dynamically encrypts and decrypts itself in memory, so that the algorithm is not unnecessarily exposed to disassembly or reverse engineering. Integrity detection example: Using one-way cryptographic hashes of the executable code segments and/or self-referential integrity dependencies, the trusted software fails to execute if it is altered prior to or during runtime. Anti-debugging example: The decryption engine prevents the use of common debugging tools. The content protection system implements secure internal data channels to prevent rogue processes from intercepting data transmitted between system processes as soon as possible after such secure internal data channels are commercially-available or are otherwise feasible. The content protection system shall prevent the use of media player filters or plug-ins that can be exploited to gain unauthorized access to content (e.g.: access to the decrypted but still encoded content by inserting a shim between the DRM and the player).
Protection against Hacking. Any system used to protect Licensed Content must support the following: