Comment by teiferer

I am aware of that, my (personal) view is that DRM is a social issue caused by modes of behaviour and the existence or non-existence of technical measures cannot fix or avoid that problem.

A lot of the concerns in this thread center on TPMs, but TPMs are really more akin to very limited HSMs that are actually under the user's control (I gave a longer explanation in a sibling comment but TPMs fundamentally trust the data given to them when doing PCR extensions -- the way that consumer hardware is fundamentally built and the way TPMs are deployed is not useful for physical "attacks" by the device owner).

Yes, you can imagine DRM schemes that make use of them but you can also imagine equally bad DRM schemes that do not use them. DRM schemes have been deployed for decades (including "lovely" examples like the Sony rootkit from the 2000s[1], and all of the stuff going on even today with South Korean banks[2]). I think using TPMs (and other security measures) for something useful to users is a good thing -- the same goes for cryptography (which is also used for DRM but I posit most people wouldn't argue that we should eschew all cryptography because of the existence of DRM).

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_BMG_copy_protection_rootk... [2]: https://palant.info/2023/01/02/south-koreas-online-security-...

This whole discussion is a perfect example of what Upton Sinclair said, "It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it."

A rational and intelligent engineer cannot possibly believe that he'll be able to control what a technology is used for after he creates it, unless his salary depends on him not understanding it.

You could tell this sort of insinuation to anyone. Including you.

Argument should be technical.