3 ms·

DRM is just a math problem (encryption) coupled with a hardware problem (retaining control of the results). The industry in, say, video games has settled on an

DRM is just a math problem (encryption) coupled with a hardware problem (retaining control of the results). The industry in, say, video games has settled on an equilibrium of making it very hard but not impossible to crack the hardware. But uncrackable encryption hardware already exists, it would just be inconvenient to make it uncrackable inside an XBox. But whether the methods of DRM are open or closed is an implementation detail. Nobody thinks that TLS being open makes it crackable. But if users and programmers know the capabilities and requirements of DRM solutions, they can sequester them from the rest of the computer.

tomp 13y ago
Your post includes a lot of words, but none of these even attempt to justify your claim that there exists open, uncrackable DRM.
- cynicalkane 13y ago
  The whole reason I started this thread is that it doesn't currently exist but I think it should.
  - jlgreco 13y ago
    And I think invisible pink unicorns should exist, limitations of reality be damned!
  - betterunix 13y ago
    An open DRM system would die in minutes, because we would just hack it to return its secret key to the user. In any DRM system, something needs to be closed.
mwcampbell 13y ago
All of the crypto in the world is worthless for a DRM system if a user can easily circumvent the system by replacing one of the components between the black-box DRM module and the hardware in order to get a perfect digital copy of the "protected" stream. This is why "content protection" systems, like the one introduced in Windows Vista, tend to be so over-reaching; they want to create a leak-proof pipe between the "protected" media and our senses.
- cynicalkane 13y ago
  That's a last mile problem the industry doesn't need to solve. How many people would rather hack hardware than pay money to watch TV and play video games? Of course, if it becomes cost-effective to hardware encrypt the entire stream, I don't think the lack of a W3C standard will make any difference in stopping it.
  - mwcampbell 13y ago
    If the DRM system is sequestered from the rest of our computers, then what I described is far from a last-mile problem. It's not a last-mile problem unless support for a "protected" playback path is baked right into the OS kernel, in a way that users would have some difficulty modifying or disabling (e.g. mandatory driver signing and Secure Boot). As long as the playback path is not secured by the kernel, there's always a way to intercept a perfect digital copy of the output in software. And the user doesn't have to know anything about user-space API hijacking, LD_PRELOAD, custom driver development, or whatever it takes, as long as there's some software they can conveniently install that does the job. So it seems to me that the proponents of DRM would never accept a DRM system that is sequestered from the rest of the computer.
  - bcoates 13y ago
    > How many people would rather hack hardware than pay money to watch TV and play video games? It only takes one. Everyone else just uses that cracked copy. I'm not worried about DRM working, I'm worried about it not working in a way that gets in my way as someone whose time is generally worth more than the hassle of finding movies on bittorrent.
    - nullc 13y ago
      This has an expedient solution of only making devices which are able to play DRMed media (perhaps with permissive flags), and having all authoring tools use a per-user content creator key. Then the same broadcast encryption keying that allows players to be selectively disable also allows the cracked transcoder to be disabled. Of course, this isn't terribly compatible with general purpose computing but operating systems intended for the public have been moving away from general purpose computing for some time and tables and mobile devices are pretty close to that now. If we go far enough down that path the makers of these handicapped devices can even get legislative help in preventing competition from more user friendly devices by outlawing their sale as was the case for macrovision.

tomp 13y ago

Your post includes a lot of words, but none of these even attempt to justify your claim that there exists open, uncrackable DRM.

cynicalkane 13y ago
The whole reason I started this thread is that it doesn't currently exist but I think it should.
- jlgreco 13y ago
  And I think invisible pink unicorns should exist, limitations of reality be damned!
- betterunix 13y ago
  An open DRM system would die in minutes, because we would just hack it to return its secret key to the user. In any DRM system, something needs to be closed.

mwcampbell 13y ago

All of the crypto in the world is worthless for a DRM system if a user can easily circumvent the system by replacing one of the components between the black-box DRM module and the hardware in order to get a perfect digital copy of the "protected" stream. This is why "content protection" systems, like the one introduced in Windows Vista, tend to be so over-reaching; they want to create a leak-proof pipe between the "protected" media and our senses.

cynicalkane 13y ago
That's a last mile problem the industry doesn't need to solve. How many people would rather hack hardware than pay money to watch TV and play video games? Of course, if it becomes cost-effective to hardware encrypt the entire stream, I don't think the lack of a W3C standard will make any difference in stopping it.
- mwcampbell 13y ago
  If the DRM system is sequestered from the rest of our computers, then what I described is far from a last-mile problem. It's not a last-mile problem unless support for a "protected" playback path is baked right into the OS kernel, in a way that users would have some difficulty modifying or disabling (e.g. mandatory driver signing and Secure Boot). As long as the playback path is not secured by the kernel, there's always a way to intercept a perfect digital copy of the output in software. And the user doesn't have to know anything about user-space API hijacking, LD_PRELOAD, custom driver development, or whatever it takes, as long as there's some software they can conveniently install that does the job. So it seems to me that the proponents of DRM would never accept a DRM system that is sequestered from the rest of the computer.
- bcoates 13y ago
  > How many people would rather hack hardware than pay money to watch TV and play video games? It only takes one. Everyone else just uses that cracked copy. I'm not worried about DRM working, I'm worried about it not working in a way that gets in my way as someone whose time is generally worth more than the hassle of finding movies on bittorrent.
  - nullc 13y ago
    This has an expedient solution of only making devices which are able to play DRMed media (perhaps with permissive flags), and having all authoring tools use a per-user content creator key. Then the same broadcast encryption keying that allows players to be selectively disable also allows the cracked transcoder to be disabled. Of course, this isn't terribly compatible with general purpose computing but operating systems intended for the public have been moving away from general purpose computing for some time and tables and mobile devices are pretty close to that now. If we go far enough down that path the makers of these handicapped devices can even get legislative help in preventing competition from more user friendly devices by outlawing their sale as was the case for macrovision.