4 ms·

DRM mostly explicitly does /not/ function that way. If you jailbreak an iPhone you can still use store apps and watch movies. You don't think that's just becau

DRM mostly explicitly does /not/ function that way. If you jailbreak an iPhone you can still use store apps and watch movies. You don't think that's just because Apple forgot about it, right? Or because the movie studios are merciful? They definitely aren't. It's because they think it'd be illegal to lock you out over it.

Retr0id 1y ago
You are mistaken. DRM can work in a variety of ways but that is absolutely one of them. Apple doesn't attestation as part of their DRM (afaik) because it wouldn't be very useful. An iOS jailbreak requires the kind of exploits that would break attestation anyway, so it adds little value. Movie studios could require strong hardware attestation for playback, but in doing so they would limit the set of compatible devices. They are in fact a little merciful (if only because they care about their bottom line). > It's because they think it'd be illegal to lock you out over it. I wish.
- astrange 1y ago
  One thing I've noticed is that when I post something here I know for a fact but that isn't common wisdom, nobody believes me. > You are mistaken. DRM can work in a variety of ways but that is absolutely one of them. Of course it can work that way. It's software, you can write whatever you want. It doesn't though. If you prefer, they have chosen to believe this is what the law says because it's a good argument if some partner asks them to do it. Similarly you can get banned from the eShop if you jailbreak your Nintendo Switch, but they don't stop you from using physical games. They could do that if they wanted to. Or rather, they could make you have to work around it.
  - Retr0id 1y ago
    > One thing I've noticed is that when I post something here I know for a fact but that isn't common wisdom, nobody believes me. No, you're just wrong. > It doesn't though It does on Android. hardware-backed safetynet attestation can be required, as a mater of policy. Many things do not require it though, for aforementioned reasons. See https://developer.android.com/google/play/integrity/verdicts#device-integrity-field https://developer.android.com/google/play/integrity/verdicts... "MEETS_DEVICE_INTEGRITY: The app is running on a genuine Play Protect certified Android-powered device. On Android 13 and higher, there is hardware-backed proof that the device bootloader is locked and the loaded Android OS is a certified device manufacturer image." > you can get banned from the eShop if you jailbreak your Nintendo Switch Nintendo bans for a bunch of things, but the act of jailbreaking alone is not one of them. They are known to ban you from online services if they detect you cheating in online multiplayer, or if their telemetry detects game piracy. If they locked you out of playing legitimate physical games for the act of jailbreaking, that would probably be illegal in a lot of jurisdictions. It would also be strategically silly, because a jailbroken console could just pirate the games anyway.
    - Retr0id 1y ago
      https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44705240 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44705240

Retr0id 1y ago

You are mistaken. DRM can work in a variety of ways but that is absolutely one of them. Apple doesn't attestation as part of their DRM (afaik) because it wouldn't be very useful. An iOS jailbreak requires the kind of exploits that would break attestation anyway, so it adds little value. Movie studios could require strong hardware attestation for playback, but in doing so they would limit the set of compatible devices. They are in fact a little merciful (if only because they care about their bottom line). > It's because they think it'd be illegal to lock you out over it. I wish.

astrange 1y ago
One thing I've noticed is that when I post something here I know for a fact but that isn't common wisdom, nobody believes me. > You are mistaken. DRM can work in a variety of ways but that is absolutely one of them. Of course it can work that way. It's software, you can write whatever you want. It doesn't though. If you prefer, they have chosen to believe this is what the law says because it's a good argument if some partner asks them to do it. Similarly you can get banned from the eShop if you jailbreak your Nintendo Switch, but they don't stop you from using physical games. They could do that if they wanted to. Or rather, they could make you have to work around it.
- Retr0id 1y ago
  > One thing I've noticed is that when I post something here I know for a fact but that isn't common wisdom, nobody believes me. No, you're just wrong. > It doesn't though It does on Android. hardware-backed safetynet attestation can be required, as a mater of policy. Many things do not require it though, for aforementioned reasons. See https://developer.android.com/google/play/integrity/verdicts#device-integrity-field https://developer.android.com/google/play/integrity/verdicts... "MEETS_DEVICE_INTEGRITY: The app is running on a genuine Play Protect certified Android-powered device. On Android 13 and higher, there is hardware-backed proof that the device bootloader is locked and the loaded Android OS is a certified device manufacturer image." > you can get banned from the eShop if you jailbreak your Nintendo Switch Nintendo bans for a bunch of things, but the act of jailbreaking alone is not one of them. They are known to ban you from online services if they detect you cheating in online multiplayer, or if their telemetry detects game piracy. If they locked you out of playing legitimate physical games for the act of jailbreaking, that would probably be illegal in a lot of jurisdictions. It would also be strategically silly, because a jailbroken console could just pirate the games anyway.
  - Retr0id 1y ago
    https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44705240 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44705240