Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Is Interoperable DRM Really Less Secure?

Posted by CowboyNeal on from the throwing-away-the-key dept.

Crouch and hold writes "Are closed DRM schemes like FairPlay more secure than interoperable ones? Based on the number of cracks, it doesn't look like it. 'When it comes to DRM, what history actually teaches us is that one approach is no more secure than the other in practice, as they relate to the keeping of secrets. Windows Media DRM has had fewer security breaches than Apple's FairPlay, yet WM DRM is licensed out the wazoo: there are more than a dozen companies with WM DRM licenses.'"

4 of 189 comments (clear)

  1. +5 informative by macadamia_harold · · Score: 5, Funny

    Windows Media DRM has had fewer security breaches than Apple's FairPlay, yet WM DRM is licensed out the wazoo

    I had no idea that the MS licensing department was actually an orifice.

    --
    Push Button, Receive Bacon
  2. Re:fairplay vs. wm? by suv4x4 · · Score: 4, Funny

    Doesn't mean anything when you consider the market share of Apple vs. all of the Microsoft-licensed stores combined. Clearly people will be cracking the more-popular DRM, and that happens to be Apple's FairPlay.

    You know, I once started thinking a lot and realized nothing ever means anything. It's all just a bunch of people arguing over unprovable hypotheses in a one-up-man-ship style and eventually spinning whatever facts they have in their disposal to reach a goal determined in advance before any analysis was done.

    Wow. I'm boring.

  3. Re:fairplay vs. wm? by prockcore · · Score: 2, Funny

    I don't think those scenarios are likely, but I tend to believe Jobs when he says he doesn't want to take the extra risk.


    I find it ironic that Apple refuses to license fairplay out of fears of piracy.
  4. Re:fairplay vs. wm? by dwater · · Score: 2, Funny

    Marvin, is that you?

    --
    Max.