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.'"

5 of 189 comments (clear)

  1. Hang on, you can't have it both ways... by spoco2 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    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. Hang on... so in this case, where it's a Microsoft product that's fairing better you apparently can being into play the 'well, it's not used on nearly as many devices as the Apple version' shtick. Yet when OSX fares better than Windows in virus threats you aren't allowed to use the exact same and just as legitimate argument that Windows is installed on VASTLY more machines than OSX, and as such is a MUCH greater target for compromise?

    How does that work?
  2. Re:funny by applegoddess · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Never said anything to the contrary, in fact I agreed with you: http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=221484&cid=179 44918

  3. Re:+5 informative by networkBoy · · Score: 3, Interesting

    True enough, but I've always looked at it as such:
    Closed DRM == one set of eyes for the "good" guys (arguably the bad guys in this case but whatever) == pwned by the freedom fighters.
    licensed DRM == several sets of eyes, eyes with different corporate mentalities, eyes with different outlooks, thus sorta like OSS == less breaches.

    -nB

    --
    whois gawk date unzip strip find touch finger mount join nice man top fsck grep eject more yes exit umount sleep dump
  4. Security Through Obscurity by thedbp · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Ahem. This is going to feel mighty good.

    The only reason that PlaysForSure isn't cracked all the time is because no one really uses it on a large scale. Since Apple dominates the DRM music field, and most DRM'd music sold is from Apple and includes FairPlay, then of course people are going to attack FairPlay more than PlaysForSure. If it were the other way around, PlaysForSure would be just as insecure as FairPlay.

    I don't really believe that, of course - but it was nice to turn the whole security through obscurity argument around for once so Windows fanboys could see how freaking STUPID it is.

  5. Re:+5 informative by DECS · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Sure throw in subscriptions. 25,000 subscribers = 1 DRM key each. You don't get to count individual songs, because once they stop paying they lose them all.

    Surely you realize that Microsoft's PFS and Zune are not making money because of ultra low revenues? That's why all the stores are tanking, and none of them brag about how many subscribers they have or songs they are selling.

    Subscription/Rental DRM is harder to manage; it makes the player a less attractive product. And it's far more onerous.

    Apple had eaten up market share long before the iTunes Store opened. Most iPod users aren't even using the iTS to a great extent - 25 songs on average is not holding people to the iPod. Outside regions with a store, there are plenty of people still buying iPods.