HN Explorer

Reverse Engineering Muxtape with a 5 Line Script

2 points by martianpenguin ↗ HN
[code]

#!/bin/bash

ARRAY=( `curl $1.muxtape.com | grep var | grep Kettle | sed "s/.\+Kettle//" | sed "s/\[//g" | sed "s/\]//g" | sed "s/;//g" | sed "s/'//g" | sed "s/(//g" | sed "s/)//g" | sed "s/,/\n/g"` )

let num=${#ARRAY[@]}/2

for ((i=0; i<$num;i+=1)); do

wget "http://muxtape.s3.amazonaws.com/songs/${ARRAY[i]}?PLEASE=DO_NOT_STEAL_MUSIC&${ARRAY[i+num]}"

done

[/code]

use it by typing ./muxtape.sh username

or use my online version: http://nopq.net/muxtape/

8 comments

[ 2.9 ms ] story [ 41.2 ms ] thread
PStamatiou
nice reverse engineer there mike. let's take bets on how fast it takes muxtape to change something like their JS array so that this doesn't work, and let's take bets on when muxtape gets shutdown for being.. illegal
yan
As you saw its simplicity in your process, the goal wasn't specifically to prevent everyone from doing this. The idea was to make it abstracted away just enough to not be obvious (maybe legal reasons or the general case scenario?).

I'm sure the author knows that anyone half-competent can get those links, but as the link asks to not steal music, I'm sure he is just betting on the good will of people.

Publishing these little "reverse engineering" (quotes for good reason) instructions for layman how to rip music from a good service is morally wrong, imho.

PStamatiou
which author are you talking about, the one here or the muxtape guy? the don't steal music thing is actually embedded in muxtape itself.
martianpenguin
The music industry thinks it is morally wrong to do what muxtape is doing. If you are going to share music on the internet though, I don't think it should be crippled to only work for people that can figure out how to get past the interface.

The music should be free or it shouldn't. There shouldn't be a gray area.

The faster any laws about this get resolved, the better. That's why I want this to be public.

yan
You are only making it harder for muxtape, not the RIAA.

There is no question that RIAA is no angel, I'm just saying you're complicating it for muxtape and the direct result might be them not being able to provide an awesome service or them having to make it much less attractive.

If this is public, muxtape potentially shuts down; RIAA does not change its unethical practices. Think about it.

martianpenguin
Why should muxtape get to do something unethical when everyone else has to follow the rules? You're basically saying this is ok because no one knows about it. Is it ok for me to steal something from a store as long as no one catches me doing it?

Perhaps a better way of going about this would be to contact the muxtape developers directly, however like you said before, they already know about this.

Also, in this situation, the RIAA would not necessarily be doing anything unethical to shut down this site. They are hosting free music on the internet. Can you think of a more straightforward way to break copyright law?

yan
That reply goes under the false assumption that I think legality == good ethics. I never said the m.o. of RIAA is ethical, however legal it may be.
rsanheim
lame. yes, everyone realizes muxtape is at risk, but that doesn't mean you need to hurry along the eventual shutdown.

muxtape is doing something very cool, and I think eventually some smart record label will understand that and release something like it. The future is here, its just in a grey zone legally (muxtape) or struggling and handcuffed (pandora, last fm).