The beginning of the end for DRM?

[Freeshadow]

What kennyc said

[ApK]

Originally Posted by jbcohen

Zetmolom is saying the same thing that the computer security community has been saying for years. No matter what the security officals do to keep information safe there will always be a hacker to find a way around it. Security folks have been saying this for years and suddently publishers are listening, what took them so long.

Ah, so we shouldn't have passwords, no encryption. We shouldn't lock any doors, since they could always be knocked down, or have keys to start cars because they could be hotwired.

No sense keeping money in bank vaults, since someone might get a bulldozer and a plasma cutter.

There is no such thing as perfect security, so we might as well not even try?


If you believe this nonsense, then by all means, you and zetmolom leave your valuables and homes unsecured.

[rkomar]

Originally Posted by ApK

Ah, so we shouldn't have passwords, no encryption. We shouldn't lock any doors, since they could always be knocked down, or have keys to start cars because they could be hotwired.

Should you keep your keys hidden within a few feet of your locks? Because with DRM, the key is hidden in the content. Finding it is just a matter of looking hard enough, and the hiding spot is the same around all the other locks.

[Ninjalawyer]

Hmmmm, this move seems somewhat promising, and Christopher Dodd (the current head of the MPAA) made some interesting comments that were quoted in Variety over the weekend:

He said Saturday that the industry will need to take a far more nuanced approach to promoting future antipiracy legislation.

"We're going to have to be more subtle and consumer-oriented," he added. "We're on the wrong track if we describe this as thievery."

Interesting, particularly as Dodd previously stated the piracy was no different than theft. Maybe the move from DRM (or at least less restrictive DRM) and Chris Dodd's apparent change of heart signals a shift in culture to a more moderate, more nuanced approach. Or not, I guess we'll see in any event.

Link

[ApK]

Originally Posted by rkomar

Should you keep your keys hidden within a few feet of your locks? Because with DRM, the key is hidden in the content. Finding it is just a matter of looking hard enough, and the hiding spot is the same around all the other locks.

And that relates to the argument of scanning and ocring each book page off an ereader, how exactly?

Saying that a particular approach is pointless because it is widely known to be trivially bypassed is one thing. Pushing the broad dimissals based on hypotheticals and impractical levels of effort that zetmolom and jbcohen posted is quite another.

[rkomar]

Originally Posted by ApK

And that relates to the argument of scanning and ocring each book page off an ereader, how exactly?

Saying that a particular approach is pointless because it is widely known to be trivially bypassed is one thing. Pushing the broad dimissals based on hypotheticals and impractical levels of effort that zetmolom and jbcohen posted is quite another.

I thought we were talking about the advice of security experts as pertaining to DRM. About whether these experts knew anything about digital locks. You seemed to have the idea that if DRM was seen to be broken, then no password system should be seen to be useful. I was explaining that in the case of DRM, the password is in the hands of the those who are to be locked out (the purchasers of the DRMed wares), and so is doomed to fail. Other cases where the password is not readily stored within the system (like most logins) are not subject to the same weakness.

[JoeD]

Please don't confuse DRM and the more useful encryption/password system used for general security. The two might share some technical commonalities in that they both use encryption and both are unlocked by keys/passwords, but one is inherently insecure by design. You can guess which.

When someone says there's no place for encryption in DRM, that does not mean they're saying there's no place for encryption in all other walks of life, that's just taking someones viewpoint beyond what was really said to try to discredit what is a valid point about DRM.

[CyGuy]

Originally Posted by ApK

Ah, so we shouldn't have passwords, no encryption. We shouldn't lock any doors, since they could always be knocked down, or have keys to start cars because they could be hotwired.

No sense keeping money in bank vaults, since someone might get a bulldozer and a plasma cutter.

There is no such thing as perfect security, so we might as well not even try?


If you believe this nonsense, then by all means, you and zetmolom leave your valuables and homes unsecured.

You are missing the point: It is up to you to decide whether or not you lock your own property. If you own your car it is up to you whether or not you want to lock it, it is not up to the car manufacture. You can remove all the locks on your car at your own discretion...

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by MovieBird

How do you purchase a credit card?

You purchase WITH a credit card.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by CyGuy

You are missing the point: It is up to you to decide whether or not you lock your own property. If you own your car it is up to you whether or not you want to lock it, it is not up to the car manufacture. You can remove all the locks on your car at your own discretion...

Sorry, I thought you were saying that you objected to the very principle of cars having locks?

[ApK]

Originally Posted by HarryT

Sorry, I thought you were saying that you objected to the very principle of cars having locks?

No, the argument seems to suggest an objection to OTHER PEOPLE having locks.
The rationale being that if it's possible to make some largely impractical effort to scan every page of an ebook, or the possibility that some hacker some where may some day break a information security system, then the whole concept of OTHER people even putting some hurdles in the way, to deter having their IP used in a way they don't want, is totally pointless. But if THEY THEMSELVES choose to put those same hurdles in place to protect THEIR OWN property, then it makes perfect sense.

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by rkomar

. Because with DRM, the key is hidden in the content. .

Wrong.

[JoeD]

Originally Posted by ApK

No, the argument seems to suggest an objection to OTHER PEOPLE having locks.
The rationale being that if it's possible to make some largely impractical effort to scan every page of an ebook, or the possibility that some hacker some where may some day break a information security system, then the whole concept of OTHER people even putting some hurdles in the way, to deter having their IP used in a way they don't want, is totally pointless. But if THEY THEMSELVES choose to put those same hurdles in place to protect THEIR OWN property, then it makes perfect sense.

It's not the same though.

With DRM you have to give the "bad guy" both the encrypted file and the key to unlock it.

It matters not one iota how "strong" the DRM is.

With a house/lock, the amount of security offered is directly proportional to the "strength"* of the lock. A house with a weak lock may be broken into pretty quickly, that doesn't make all locks invalid. A house with a strong lock may not be feasible to break into. The same cannot be said about DRM.

If you've to give the key to the weak or strong lock to anyone who wants in, then you may as well not bother buying a lock in the first place.

That's more or less what I think the earlier poster was trying to say about DRM.

* strength does not have to mean physical strength of the lock, although that certainly plays a part, but mainly how hard it is to unlock the lock without a key. Given a key the strongest lock in the world is trivial to unlock, it has to be

[EowynCarter]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

That won't actually work all that well. In a lot of cases, after the format shift, there's some tidying up that may need to be done. So unless I can do that tidying up, forget it. Also, this lightweight DRM won't catch on because that would mean that ePub no longer works on the majority of apps/software/devices.

Yup. The only alternatives are stick with adept, or go DRM-free.

[CyGuy]

Originally Posted by HarryT

Sorry, I thought you were saying that you objected to the very principle of cars having locks?

No, I never said that or implied that. I clearly said that locks you have on your own property are yours to do with as you please for personal use. You can lock them, unlock them, or remove them altogether. The owner of the item decides, not the manufacture/seller of the product. I simply don't know how to say it any clearer.