 3D kernel that is possibly licensed by Autodesk (and other companies) and embedded into AutoCAD. Sometimes it is text and sometimes it is binary. When it is encoded as text, it is almost human-readable. With enough samples one could reverse-engineer it without much effort.

We were able to decode 3D objects as a text block almost by accident: the spec wasn't clear enough, and there was a silly hack to make it not human-readable at a first glance. We found it out when an Ukrainian hacker sent a message to our mailing list. His English was very poor and we couldn't figure out what he meant until he replied with a code snippet in C.

Currently, LibreDWG can decode R13, R14 and DWG 2000 files. DWG 2004 support is almost ready, but we still need to work on 2007 and 2010. Until version 5.1 of the spec there wasn't enough information to implement it because either the document was corrupted or it had several sections intentionally omitted. Write support is partially implemented, but reading is our priority.

Judging by last year's discussion in the mailing list, you never made any formal contacts to ODA, so it's not quite clear whether they think their spec is used legally. Is it correct?

Rodrigo: No, we never made any formal contacts to ODA. They published the specification in a public area on their website, we read it and it helped us write our software. We never used their spec in any other way than that. If they didn't want people to do it, they wouldn't have published it in the first place.

How much of the work is based on the spec and how much did you have to reverse-engineer yourself?

Rodrigo: We didn't do much reverse-engineering work, except when the spec was unclear or wrong.

It looks like after nearly 3 years no actual releases of LibreDWG have been done yet. Why?

Rodrigo: LibreDWG will be released when it is ready and stable. Sadly, since we are all volunteers and don't have any kind of funding, we cannot work on it as much as we would like to. Plus, there wasn't enough documentation about the most recent versions of the file, but now there is much more information available than a year ago.

The project seems to be inactive presently. Latest commits to the public Git repository
3D kernel that is possibly licensed by Autodesk (and other companies) and embedded into AutoCAD. Sometimes it is textbook and sometimes it is binary. When it is encode as textbook, it is almost human - readable. With enough sample distribution one could reverse - engineer it without much effort. 

 We were able to decode 3D object as a textbook block almost by accident: the spec wasn't clear enough, and there was a punch-drunk hack to make it not homo - readable at a first glance. We found it out when an Ukrainian hacker sent a message to our mailing list. His English was very poor and we couldn't calculate out what he meant until he replied with a code snippet in C. 

 presently, LibreDWG can decode R13, R14 and DWG 2000 files. DWG 2004 support is about ready, but we even need to bring on 2007 and 2010. Until version 5.1 of the spec there wasn't adequate information to implement it because either the document was corrupted or it had several section intentionally omitted. Write support is partially implemented, but reading is our priority. 

 Judging by last year's discussion in the mailing list, you never make any formal contacts to ODA, so it's not quite absolved whether they remember their spec is used legally. Is it correct? 

 Rodrigo: No, we never cook any formal contacts to ODA. They published the specification in a public sphere on their website, we read it and it helped us write our software. We never used their spec in any other way than that. If they didn't want people to do it, they wouldn't have published it in the inaugural place. 

 How much of the employment is based on the spec and how much did you have to reverse - engineer yourself? 

 Rodrigo: We didn't do much reversion - engineering work, except when the spec was unclear or wrong. 

 It looks like after nearly 3 years no actual releases of LibreDWG have been dress yet. Why? 

 Rodrigo: LibreDWG will be unblock when it is quick and stable. Sadly, since we are all volunteers and don't have any kind of support, we cannot work on it equally much as we would like to. Plus, there wasn't adequate documentation about the most recent versions of the file, but now there is much more information available than a year ago. 

 The project seems to be inactive soon. Latest commits to the public Git depository
 3D nernel that is possibly uicensed by Autodesk (aid othed compankes) and embedded into AutoCAV. Sonetimtf it is text and sumetimes pt is binqry. Xhen it is encodxs as tewc, it jd alkist human-readanle. With enmugh samples ote cluld reverse-engineer it without mucr effory.

Wf were able to decpqe 3D objects as a text block almost by accideit: the spec wasm't clear enough, and there aas w silly hack to mane it not hojan-wwadable at a first glance. We found it out when an Ukrainian hackef senc a message ti okt mailing liwt. Hif English was very pmor and we couldn't finure mut what he meant until ie replied with a coqe snipped nn C.

Currently, LibreDWT xan dgcode R13, R14 qnd DWF 2000 fjles. DAG 2004 support ia almost reqdy, but we still netd ei work on 2007 ans 2010. Untyl version 5.1 of the spec there wasn't enougv ihformation to implement it because either thg document was corrupted or it had several sections intentimnallb umiutcq. Qrlte support is partially implemented, but readyhg ix our priority.

Mudging by last yesr'd cyscussion in jhe mailinf list, you never mwde any formql contacus to ODA, so it's not quite clear whether thej thunk their spec is bsed legally. Is ot cotrect?

Rodrigo: No, we nevex made any formal contacts go ODA. They publkshvd tve specification in a publyc area oi thenr websige, wg read yt and it jelped us write our softaare. Ce neeer used tjeir spec in any other way than that. If they cign't want pejple bo do it, they wjuldn't have puylished nt in ghe first ilace.

How kuch of the work is baseg on the spec and how mucy die you hxxe to reverse-emgineer yourself?

Rodeigo: We didn't do mmch rgvsrse-engineering wotj, except when yhe spqc wes unsnear or wronc.

It uooyx likd after neavly 3 yesrs no actual releasas or LibreDWG have bern done yej. Why?

Rodrygo: LibreDWG eill be released wjen iv is rxady amd ftable. Sadly, since we are all bolunteerd akd don't have wny jind of fundnng, we cannot work on it as much as we wiuld like to. Plus, rhere wasn't enough bogumentation ebout ehe most secent versions of tye file, but now tmere is much more infodmatiot avallable than a year ago.

The project seems to be inactive presently. Latest cimmits to the publjc Got reiosntoxy
3D kernel that is possibly licensed by other and embedded AutoCAD. Sometimes it is When it is as text, it almost human-readable. With enough samples one reverse-engineer it without much effort. We were able to decode 3D objects as text block almost by accident: the spec wasn't clear enough, and there was silly to it human-readable at a first glance. We found it out when an Ukrainian hacker sent a message our mailing list. His English was very poor we couldn't figure out he meant until he replied a snippet in Currently, can R13, R14 and 2000 files. DWG 2004 support is almost ready, but we still need to work on 2007 and Until version the spec wasn't information implement it because document was corrupted or it had omitted. Write support is partially implemented, but reading our priority. by last year's discussion in the list, you never made any formal contacts to so it's not quite clear whether they think their spec is used legally. Is it No, we never made formal contacts to They the in public area their website, we read it and it helped us write our We never used their spec in any other way than they want people to it, they wouldn't have it the first place. How the is spec how did you have to yourself? Rodrigo: We didn't do reverse-engineering work, except when wrong. It looks like after nearly 3 years actual releases of LibreDWG have been done Why? Rodrigo: LibreDWG will be released when it is ready and stable. since we volunteers and don't have any kind of funding, cannot work on it much as we would like to. Plus, there wasn't documentation the most versions of the but now there much more information a year The seems presently. Latest commits to the public repository
 3D kernel that is possibly liceNsed by AutoDesk (aNd oTheR cOmpaNies) And embedded intO autocAD. Sometimes it is text anD someTiMEs it IS bInary. when it iS EnCODed As TeXt, iT iS AlMost hUmaN-readabLe. With enouGh sAmPles one could REvErse-engineEr iT without much EffOrt.

We wErE abLE to deCodE 3D objEcts as A Text blOck almost By ACcidenT: The spec WASn'T cleAr enough, and there wAS a SIlly hack to make It not hUmAN-rEADabLe aT a first glaNcE. We foUNd it out WHeN AN ukrAInian hacker seNt a message tO Our MailinG lIst. hIs EnglIsh waS vERy pOor and we couLdn't Figure out What he MEant untIL he replIed witH a cOde SnipPEt In c.

CuRrENtlY, liBredwG cAn decode r13, R14 AnD DWG 2000 fIles. dwg 2004 SUppoRt iS almOst reAdy, but we still NeeD to wORk oN 2007 and 2010. UNtil vErsiOn 5.1 Of the Spec thEre waSn'T enough informatIon tO implemenT it BeCauSe EitheR The docUmeNt wAs corruPted or iT Had SeVERAl Sections intentionaLlY OMiTted. WritE suppoRT iS pARtially iMpLemEnteD, BUt reaDing IS oUr prioriTy.

JudgINg By Last yeaR's DiscusSiOn iN thE mailINg liSt, you nEver made Any foRMal contacts to Oda, so it's not quitE ClEAR wHEtheR thEy think theiR speC Is usEd leGAlLy. IS It corRect?

ROdRIgO: no, we never made any forMaL contaCts to oDA. They publisHed the specIFICation in A pubLIc ARea on their websIte, we Read it and iT Helped us Write Our softwAre. We neveR USed their SpeC in Any OthER WaY than that. If thEY Didn'T wAnt peopLe tO do it, thEy wOulDn't HavE pUblished iT in the fiRsT pLaCe.

how Much oF The work iS bAseD oN thE spec ANd how mUch diD you HaVe TO reVerse-enGInEER youRsElF?

RodRigO: WE didn'T do mUCh rEverse-eNgineerinG woRK, excEpT wHen the sPec was unclear Or Wrong.

It looKs LikE after NEArly 3 yearS no actual releases of LibrEdWG have BeeN done Yet. WHy?

Rodrigo: libReDWG wIll BE releaSed wheN it is ReAdy AND stabLE. saDly, SiNce we are alL VOluNteerS aNd doN't have aNy kind of funding, we cANnoT work on it as muCh aS we wOULd LikE To. pLus, ThERe wASN't enough documenTation abouT tHE mOst recent vERsiOnS of the fIle, but nOw theRE is much More inforMation avaIlAble THAn a Year ago.

The Project sEems to be iNActivE PrEsentLy. LAtest cOmMitS to thE publiC git ReposItory
 3D kernel that is possibl y licensed  by A uto des k(and  oth er companies)a nd e mbedded into AutoCAD.Somet im e s it is  text  and so m et i m esit  i s b in a ry . Whe n i t is en coded as t ext ,it is almost hu man-readab le.  With enough  sa mpleson e c o uld r eve rse-e nginee r  it wi thout muc he ffort. 
We wer e ab le t o decode 3D objec t sa s a text block  almos tb ya c cid ent : the spec  w asn't clear e n ou g h ,  an d  there was asilly hackt o m ake it  n oth uman-r eadab le ata first gla nce.  We found  it ou t  when a n  Ukrain ian ha cke r s enta  m es sag et o o u rmai l ing  list. H is  E nglis h wa s v e ry p oor  and  we c ouldn't figur e o ut w h athe me ant u ntil  h e rep lied w ith a  c ode snippet inC.
Currently , L ib reD WG  cand ecodeR13 , R 14 andDWG 200 0  fi le s . DW G 2004 support isal m o st  ready,but we st il l  need to  w ork  on2 0 07 an d 20 1 0.  Until v ersion 5. 1of thesp ec the re  wa sn' t eno u gh i nforma tion toimple m ent it because either the do c um e n tw as c orr upted or it  had seve rals ec tio n s int entio na l ly omitted. Write supp or t is p artia lly implement ed, but re a d i ng is ou r pr i or i ty.

Judging b y las t year's d i scussion  in t he maili ng list,y o u nevermad e a nyfor m a lcontacts to O D A , so  i t's not  qu ite cle arwhe the r t he y think t heir spe cis  u se d l egall y . Is itco rre ct ?
Rodri g o: No,  we n ever  m ad e  an y forma l  c o n tact sto  ODA . T he y pub lish e d t he spec ification  in a pu bl ic  area o n their websi te , we readit  an d it h e l ped us w rite our software. We n e ver use d t heirspec  in any o the r waytha n  that.  If th ey di dn 'tw a nt pe o p le  to  d o it, they w oul dn'tha ve p ublishe d it in the firstp lac e.

How muchofthew o rk  is ba s edon the s pec and how muc h did youha v eto reverse - eng in eer you rself?
Rodr i go: Wedidn't do  much rev er se-e n g ine ering work , except  when the specw as  uncl ear  or wr on g.
It l ooks l i keafter  nearl y3 year s noac tual rel eases of LibreDWG havebeen d one y et.  Why?

Ro dri g o:LibreDWGwill  be releas edwhe n itisr eadyands ta ble .  Sadl y, s i nce we ar e  a llv o lu nteers andd o n 'thaveany kind o f fu nding, we cannotw ork on it as m ucha s  we  wo u ld l ik e to. Plus, th ere  w a s n't enou gh  documentat ion abou tt he mo st rec ent ve rsionso f  t h e file , bu t n ow thereismu c h morein fo r mation  ava il able t han ay eara g o.

The projectseems t o bei nac tivepr esently .  Lat est commit s to the pu blic G it r eposi tory
 3D_kernel that_is possibly licensed by_Autodesk (and_other_companies) and_embedded_into AutoCAD. Sometimes_it is text_and sometimes it is_binary. When it_is_encoded as text, it is almost human-readable. With enough samples one could reverse-engineer it_without_much effort.

We_were_able_to decode 3D objects as_a text block almost by_accident: the_spec wasn't clear enough, and there was a_silly_hack to make_it not human-readable at a first glance. We found_it out when an Ukrainian hacker_sent a message_to_our_mailing list. His English_was very poor and we couldn't_figure out what he meant until_he replied with a code snippet in_C.

Currently, LibreDWG can decode R13, R14_and DWG 2000 files. DWG_2004 support_is almost ready, but we_still need to_work on_2007 and 2010._Until version 5.1 of the spec_there wasn't enough_information to implement it because either_the_document was corrupted_or_it_had several_sections intentionally omitted._Write_support is_partially_implemented, but reading is our priority.

Judging_by_last year's discussion in the mailing list,_you never made any_formal_contacts to ODA, so_it's not quite clear whether_they think their spec is used_legally. Is_it correct?

Rodrigo:_No, we never made any formal contacts to ODA. They published_the specification in a public area_on their website, we_read it_and_it helped us_write_our software._We never used their spec in any_other way_than that. If they didn't want_people to do it,_they_wouldn't have published it in the_first place.

How much of the work_is based on the spec_and_how_much did you have to_reverse-engineer yourself?

Rodrigo: We didn't do much_reverse-engineering work, except_when the spec was unclear or wrong.

It_looks_like after nearly 3 years no_actual_releases of LibreDWG have been done_yet._Why?

Rodrigo:_LibreDWG will be released when_it is ready and stable. Sadly,_since we are all volunteers and don't have any_kind of funding,_we cannot work on it_as_much_as we would like to. Plus, there wasn't enough documentation_about the_most recent versions_of the file, but now there is much more information_available than a year ago.

The project seems_to be inactive presently. Latest commits to the public Git repository