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.'"

1 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?