Is Interoperable DRM Really Less Secure?

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.'"

Comments

Stupid

[phoenixwade]

That is only true if Apple supporters are doing so. Something I didn't read in TFA (or the comments for that matter). I'm an Apple supporter, yet I don't apply this reasoning to either the DRM or the OS comparison. I haven't seen a lot of Apple supporters, much less ALL of them, comment in any form on the closed nature of Fairplay, or even commenting on DRM much at all. It wouldn't surprise me in the least to find that most "Apple Supporters" have no idea what Fairplay is, even.

Your remark, as far as I can see, is not only unsupported, it's erroneous. Just the musings of a fanboi troll looking to start "Yet Another MS v Apple thread" as if there weren't enough of those around /. already to amuse anyone for years of reading.