Analysis of Security Vulnerabilities in the Movie Production and Distribution Process Simon Byers, Lorrie Cranor Eric Cronin Dave Kormann, Patrick McDaniel University of Pennsylvania AT&T Labs - Research Philadelphia, PA Florham Park, NJ [email protected] byers,lorrie,davek,pdmcdan ¡ @research.att.com September 13, 2003 Abstract ing available to those who may wish to redistribute them. Finally, we offer recommendations for reduc- ing security vulnerabilities in the movie production Unauthorized copying of movies is a major con- and distribution process. cern for the motion picture industry. While unau- thorized copies of movies have been distributed via portable physical media for some time, low-cost, 1 Introduction high-bandwidth Internet connections and peer-to- peer file sharing networks provide highly efficient The U.S. motion picture industry estimates that its distribution media. Many movies are showing up revenue losses due to unauthorized copying and re- on file sharing networks shortly after, and in some distribution of movies via physical media (video cas- cases prior to, theatrical release. It has been argued settes, DVDs, VCDs etc.) exceeds $3 billion annu- that the availability of unauthorized copies directly ally [22].1 Each year over 400 facilities for illegally affects theater attendance and DVD sales, and hence duplicating audiovisual content are discovered in the represents a major financial threat to the movie indus- U.S., and many more are believed to remain undis- try. Our research attempts to determine the source of covered in both the U.S. and overseas [30]. In 2001, unauthorized copies by studying the availability and 74 such facilities were raided in Asia [32]. Malaysia, characteristics of recent popular movies in file shar- Pakistan, and China are believed to be among the ing networks. We developed a data set of 312 pop- largest producers of unauthorized copies of audiovi- ular movies and located one or more samples of 183 sual content. The movie industry has not released of these movies on file sharing networks, for a to- estimates of revenue losses due to Internet redistribu- tal of 285 movie samples. 77% of these samples ap- tion of unauthorized copies; however, recent studies pear to have been leaked by industry insiders. Most have estimated that there are 350,000 to 400,000 ille- of our samples appeared on file sharing networks gal movie downloads each day and projected revenue prior to their official consumer DVD release date. In- loses of up to $4 billion annually within the next two deed, of the movies that had been released on DVD years [11, 33]. as of the time of our study, only 5% first appeared Estimating revenue losses due to illegal down- after their DVD release date on a web site that in- loads is problematic because it is difficult to deter- dexes file sharing networks, indicating that consumer mine what fraction of illegal downloads result in lost DVD copying currently represents a relatively minor revenue for the industry and whether illegal down- factor compared with insider leaks. We perform a 1 brief analysis of the movie production and distribu- In some statements the MPAA has claimed this number in- cludes only analog video cassette distribution [32], while in other tion process and identify potential security vulnera- statements the MPAA has claimed this number covers all illegal bilities that may lead to unauthorized copies becom- distribution except Internet distribution [22]. 1 loads, through the “free publicity” they generate, have any positive impacts on box office revenues. Nonetheless, it is likely that redistribution of unau- thorized copies via the Internet will increasingly af- fect DVD movie sales and paid Internet distribution of movies. As the ease of downloading unautho- rized copies of movies grows with the availability of low-cost, high-bandwidth Internet connections and peer-to-peer file sharing networks, the movie indus- Figure 1: A preliminary version of the film “The try’s concerns about illegal downloads is intensify- Hulk” was criticized for the poor quality of its CGI. ing. These concerns are heightened by unauthorized The watermarks in the bottom right corner were re- copies of movies becoming available on the Internet moved in an attempt to mask its origin. prior to their U.S. theater release [29]. Much of the discussion about preventing unau- thorized copying of movies has focused on shutting which were widely criticized on Internet message down the mass production and distribution of pirated boards [15]. Within three weeks Kerry Gonzalez was movies and on schemes to prevent consumers from charged with posting the purloined film on the Inter- making unauthorized copies of movies from DVDs, net. Gonzalez reportedly obtained a video tape of a VCDs, paid Internet downloads, or digital televi- pre-release “work print” of the movie from a friend, sion broadcasts [32]. Until recently, there was lit- who had in turn received it from an employee of a tle public discussion about security measures to pre- Manhattan print advertising firm that was promoting vent unauthorized copies of movies from falling into the movie. He plead guilty to a single count of felony the hands of those who will mass produce them— copyright infringement and faces fines and up to three sometimes before their theatrical release. In a recent years in prison [20, 27]. interview with The Guardian, one industry watcher, Our research attempts to classify the sources of Mark Endemano, director of Deloitte Consulting’s unauthorized Internet copies of movies that were in media practice, criticized the movie industry for con- the U.S. box office top 50 during an 18-month pe- centrating on bootleg DVDs and video cassettes [33]. riod beginning in January 2002. Much unsubstan- In a Wall Street Journal interview, Walt Disney Stu- tiated debate has occurred, but we know of no reli- dios chief Dick Cook criticized the common industry able data on this subject in the public domain. In practice of sending out thousands of screener DVDs this paper we present a brief analysis of the movie to Academy voters, saying that the industry had been production and distribution process and identify se- slow to acknowledge that this practice was facilitat- curity vulnerabilities that may lead to unauthorized ing movie piracy. “The unfortunate part of this in- copies of movies becoming available to those who dustry sometimes is that it has to get hit over the head may wish to redistribute them. We present our anal- before something happens,” he said [18]. ysis of time lags between Internet, theater, and DVD In the Spring of 2003 several press reports high- releases during our study period. We describe our lighted security measures that movie studios were methodology for determining the probable source of putting in place to prevent unauthorized copying of Internet copies and the results of our analysis. Fi- movies during the pre-screenings conducted for the nally, we offer recommendations for reducing secu- media or as part of marketing research [12, 26, 29]. rity vulnerabilities in the movie production and dis- Despite these measures, some movies are becoming tribution process. available on the Internet before their theatrical re- lease, and in some cases before a movie has been fully edited. For example, an early version of Univer- 2 Movie Production and Distribu- sal’s The Hulk began circulating on the Internet two tion weeks before its June 20, 2003 U.S. theater release date (see Figure 1). The version illegally released Our examination of security vulnerabilities begins on the Internet had incomplete computer graphics, with the movie production process, in which vari- 2 ous audio, video, and digital artifacts are created and lease, and after DVD release.2 This last phase, after combined into the finished product. We then examine DVD release, represents an opportunity for end con- the movie distribution process, which includes the sumers to make unauthorized copies (e.g., by directly physical or electronic distribution of movies to con- ripping the content from purchased DVDs). sumers as well as to critics, awards judges, and oth- Prior to theater release, the final version may be ers. Marketing and related activities may occur dur- distributed to many parties. Critics and awards judges ing both the production and distribution processes. may receive copies. Note that this process serves an Figure 2 describes one possible production and essential function in the movie industry: to publi- distribution workflow. Note that this is but one model cize and draw (hopefully positive) commentary about of the production environment. Each studio has a the movie. However, the sheer number of people in- unique set of tasks and participants, but we believe volved at this stage considerably complicates content that most studios’ processes include almost all of security. Many studio employees have access to the those shown here. While our analysis is driven by final version: marketing and executives continue to this workflow, it is not dependent on the particular view the content and build and execute strategies for details of this structure. its promotion. The content is typically delivered in The nexus of the production process is the edit- some portable format (VHS or DVD) to all these par- ing room. This is the place where the film is as- ties. sembled by cutting and mixing the physical loca- The content itself must be replicated by a film pro- tion video and audio recordings (shots). Once rough duction facility, where any number of employees may cuts of these shots are available, additional aspects have access to it. On or immediately prior to the re- such as computer generated special effects (FX) and lease date, the content is delivered to the cinema. His- music and sound synthesis (aud) are added by out- torically, movie releases have been staggered across side parties.